Grand Chute v. Winegar
Supreme Court of the United States
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Eastern Distinct of Wisconsin. The town of Grand Chute, in Wisconsin, filed its hill on the equity side of the court below against one Winegar; three other persons, Goodwin, Ilewett, and Conkey, being also made defendants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Eastern Distinct of Wisconsin. The town of Grand Chute, in Wisconsin, filed its hill on the equity side of the court below against one Winegar; three other persons, Goodwin, Ilewett, and Conkey, being also made defendants. It set forth that Winegar had brought suit on the law side of the same court against the town to recover from it the amount of certain bonds — nine in number, and -for the sum of $8500 in all — purporting to have been issued by the said town; that the bonds were issued without authority, in violation of law, and in fraud of the town, by…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hunt
The inquiry at once suggests itself upon reading the bill in this case, why does the plaintiff file it? Can any relief be had in this suit which could' not be obtained in the suit sought to be enjoined? It is an elementary principle of equity law that, when full and adequate relief can be obtained in a suit at law, a suit in equity cannot be maintained. In Hipp v. Babin * the court say: “The bill in this case is in substance and legal effect an ejectment bill. The title appears by the bill to be merely legal, the evidence to support it appears from documents accessible to either party, and no…
2Cited by67 opinions
- Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. WestoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Schoenthal v. Irving Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Buzard v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Louisville Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Hapgood v. HewittSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.