United States v. Marshall
District Court, S.D. New York
Xu Equity. Action by the United States; against Edward G. iVIarshall and others, impleaded with the Illinois Surety Company and others, intervening defendants.
1Opinion of the Court
I,EARNED HAND, District Judge.
Upon final hearing precisely the same record appears as before, and there is no reason to change the rulings made at the time. The objection that the claims, except Eehr’s, were not filed in time, seems to me clearly to' be unsound under the language of the second proviso, which limits intervention to a period of one year only when the suit is instituted by creditors.
The objection that the interveners should have given notice under the last proviso seems to me 'also to be bad, though not so certainly. Judge Wituier has held that this proviso is a necessary…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Texas Portland Cement Co. v. McCordSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- United States v. McGeeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri · 1909
- United States ex rel. Chief All Over v. BaileyDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1913
- United States ex rel. Hollinger v. StannardDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1913
3Cited by1 opinion
- Antrim Lumber Co. v. HannanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1927