White v. Whitman
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island
The defendant pleaded in abatement as follows: “And the defendant comes and defends, &e., when, &c., and says that he ought not to be held to answer to the above writ and declaration of the plaintiffs, but the same ought to abate; because he says that the said plaintiffs heretofore, to wit, at the honorable superior court, holden at Brooklyn, in and for the county of Windham, in the state of Connecticut, on the second Tuesday of April, A. D. 1853, impleaded the said…
Read the full summary
The defendant pleaded in abatement as follows: “And the defendant comes and defends, &e., when, &c., and says that he ought not to be held to answer to the above writ and declaration of the plaintiffs, but the same ought to abate; because he says that the said plaintiffs heretofore, to wit, at the honorable superior court, holden at Brooklyn, in and for the county of Windham, in the state of Connecticut, on the second Tuesday of April, A. D. 1853, impleaded the said defendant in an action of the ease, and for the same cause in the declaration aforesaid above-mentioned; which said action of…
1Opinion of the Court
CURTIS, Circuit Justice.
The pendency of another action for the same cause in a foreign court, is not a good plea in abatement at the common law. The question is, whether the court of the state of Connecticut is to be considered a foreign court, within the meaning of this rule. In Browne v. Joy, 9 Johns. 221, it was held that such a plea of a’ former action in another state court, was not a good plea; and in Walsh v. Durkin, 12 Johns. 99. the same law- was held applicable to a plea of a former suit pending in a circuit court of the United States. These eases seem to me to have been correctly…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bowne v. JoyNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Walsh v. DurkinNew York Supreme Court · 1815
3Cited by7 opinions
- STANTON v. Embrey, AdministratorSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Chadwick v. GillCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1928
- Bunker Hill & Sullivan Mining & Concentrating Co. v. Shoshone Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1901
- United States v. OlmsteadDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1925
- Olney v. TannerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1882
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.