Ivy v. Lusk

The motion to dismiss the appeal in this ease, cannot pre*487vail. Mr. Quarles is not a warrantor in the legal sense, although styled so in the pleadings in the district court.

The pretensions of plaintiff, as well as those of defendant, to the office of Harbor Master, are not only independents of, but antagonistic to, those of Mr. Quarles. The case of Williams v. Courtney, 8th Ann. 68, has therefore no application.

The true test of the necessary parties to an appeal is this: Has the party an interest that the judgment appealed from be maintained? As to Quarles, it is plain that such an interest…