Marvin v. Ellwood
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the fourth circuit, dismissing the complainant’s bill of interpleader ; with costs, as to the defendant EUwood, and without costs as to the other defendant.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the fourth circuit, dismissing the complainant’s bill of interpleader ; with costs, as to the defendant EUwood, and without costs as to the other defendant. In the latter part of 1836, Asa Farr left a note, against O. H. Dibble & Co. with the complainant for collection ; which note was originally given to the mercantile firm of Farr & Farnham, and was endorsed, in the copartnership name, by J. G. Farr, one of the members of that firm, to Asa Farr. Judgment was recovered upon the note, in July, 1837, in favor of Asa Farr, for $511,32,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
I agree with the vice chancellor, that there is such evidence' of collusive conduct, on the part of the complainant in this suit, to aid the claim of the defendant Titus, at the expense of the interest of his own client, that if no other objection existed, this bill of interpleader ought not to be sustained. A party who comes into this court as a complainant, in a simple bill of interpleader, must not have lent himself in any way to further the claim of either party to the fund in controversy, or to aid one in obtaining the possession thereof to the exclusion of the other. A…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Standley v. RobertsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1894
- Nelson v. Goree'r Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Williams v. WrightTexas Supreme Court · 1857
- United Producers' Pipe Line Co. v. BrittonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- German Exchange Bank v. Board of Commissioners of ExciseNew York Supreme Court · 1879
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.