Fine Lake Iron Co. v. La Fayette Car Works
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana
Petition of intervention by B. P. Adams in the suit of the Pine Lake Iron Company against the La Payette Oar Works for the purpose of establishing a claim against the receiver.
1Opinion of the Court
WOODS, Circuit Judge.
When the receiver was appointed the intervener had a suit pending in one of the courts of Hew York for the same demand that is in question here. In pursuance of the notice requiring that claims against the receiver be filed here within a time limited, the intervener presented the claim here, saying nothing of the suit in Hew York, and it was referred to the master for proof. Having obtained judgment in the Hew York court, the intervener obtained leave of the master, subject to exceptions, to amend his state-' ment of the claim so as to show the recovery of the judgment,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pringle v. . WoolworthNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
3Cited by6 opinions
- Riehle v. MargoliesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Brunk v. Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- Alabama Terminal R. R. v. BennsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
- Hatch v. Morosco Holding Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Armstrong v. Louisiana Ice & Utilities, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.