Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Idaho (3)
- Federal questions (2)
- Judicial Code (2)
- Multiple hearings (2)
- American Surety Company v. Baldwin (1)
-
- Allied Metal Stamping Co. v. Standard Electric Equipment Corp. (1)
- Attachments (1)
- Aylward Coal Co. v. Luyckx (1)
- Bainbridge v. Merchants' & Miners' Transportation Co. (1)
- Baldwin v. American Surety Company (1)
- Baltimore (1)
- Chancery courts (1)
- Convenience (1)
- Copyright infringement (1)
- Crossbills (1)
- Due process (1)
- Exemptions (1)
- Federal practice (1)
- Forum non conveniens (1)
- Fraud (1)
- Full faith and credit (1)
- General Electric Co. et al. v. Marvel Rare Metals Co. et al. (1)
- Iowa (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Jurisdictional questions (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Maryland (1)
- Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (1)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Practice - Appeal And Error - Dismissal Of Counterclaim Because Of Improper Venue Appealable As Interlocutory Order Denying Injunction
Michigan Law Review
To plaintiffs' suit for patent infringement defendants counterclaimed upon an unrelated patent asking for an injunction and an accounting. Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue was sustained by the district court. Defendants appealed and plaintiffs moved to dismiss on the ground that dismissal of a counterclaim was not a refusal of an injunction and therefore not appealable under Sec. 129, Judicial Code. The circuit court of appeals allowed the appeal and this decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court. General Electric Co. et al. v. Marvel Rare Metals Co. et al., 287 U.S. 430, 53 …
Federal Practice -Venue - Plaintiff's Privilege In Respect To Defendant's Counterclaim On An Unrelated Patent
Michigan Law Review
Petitioners brought suit in the federal court for the northern district of Ohio against defendant corporations having regular and established places of business in that district and against two individual defendants resident there alleging infringement of patent rights and asking for injunction, damages, and an accounting. Defendants' answer denied infringement and set up a counterclaim based on a patent granted one of the defendants praying for an injunction against infringement and an accounting. Defendants' counterclaim did not allege that petitioners were inhabitants of the district where the counterclaim was to be tried or that they had regular and established places …
Admiralty-Venue Of Action Brought In State Court Under Jones Act
Admiralty-Venue Of Action Brought In State Court Under Jones Act
Michigan Law Review
The plaintiff brought suit in a county court of Pennsylvania to to recover damages for injuries sustained by her while a member of the steamship crew of the defendant. The action was based on the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 which provided: "Jurisdiction in such actions shall be under the court of the district in which the defendant employer resides or in which his principal office is located." Defendant corporation moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction since defendant's principal office was in Baltimore. The motion was granted and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court …
Trial Practice - Special Appearance To Contest Garnishment
Trial Practice - Special Appearance To Contest Garnishment
Michigan Law Review
The proceeds of an insurance policy payable to the defendant, a non-resident, were attached by garnishment. The defendant, who was served by publication, filed a paper entitled "Special Appearance" to question the jurisdiction of the court over his person and property. The lower court sustained the special appearance on the ground that the proceeds of the policy were exempt from garnishment. Held, that the exemption of the proceeds was not material to the question of jurisdiction in rem, so it should not have been considered on special appearance. Reversed with leave to the defendant to enter a general …
Wills And Administration - Jurisdiction Over The Probate Of Lost Or Destroyed Wills
Wills And Administration - Jurisdiction Over The Probate Of Lost Or Destroyed Wills
Michigan Law Review
Under Mich. Comp. Laws (1929), sec. 15547, a will lost, suppressed or destroyed may be admitted to probate upon its being established in a prescribed manner in the probate court. And under sec. 15543 no will is effectual to pass title to property unless probated as required by law. Plaintiff coal company, apparently under the direction of its manager, King, filed a bill of interpleader for a judicial determination as to whether it should pay rent as lessee of certain property to the administrator of the estate of the deceased lessor, or to King, who claimed as devisee of the …
Corporations - Interference With The Internal Affairs Of A Foreign Corporation
Corporations - Interference With The Internal Affairs Of A Foreign Corporation
Michigan Law Review
The quaint cliché, "interference with the internal affairs of a foreign corporation," has sufficiently dominated judicial decisions to merit an exalted place in what Justice Cardozo has called "the tyranny of tags and tickets." A frequently adopted analysis for the purpose of determining whether the court will hear the cause allegedly involving internal affairs confines the inquiry of the court to the application of a test laid down by the Maryland court about a half century ago.
Practice And Procedure - Declaratory Judgment
Practice And Procedure - Declaratory Judgment
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff brought an action under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act to be adjudged the lawful child of J. C., deceased. A demurrer upon the grounds that no cause of action was stated and that the court lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter was sustained. On appeal, held, error. The question of status can be determined under the Act independent of any controversy relating to other rights. Miller v. Currie, (Wis. 1932) 242 N. W. 570.
Constitutional Law - Federal Questions Reviewable By The Supreme Court
Constitutional Law - Federal Questions Reviewable By The Supreme Court
Michigan Law Review
Two cases decided by the Supreme Court at the October, 1932, term of Court raised important questions of federal practice and due process of law. Judgment was rendered, on motion, without notice, pursuant to the terms of the bond, against the American Surety Company on a supersedeas bond given in an action in which the Singer Sewing Machine Company and one Anderson were the defendants in the trial court after the Supreme Court of Idaho had affirmed the judgment of the trial court as to Anderson and reversed it as to the Sewing Machine Company. An order of the trial …
Constitutional Law-Res Judicata In Federal Courts
Constitutional Law-Res Judicata In Federal Courts
Michigan Law Review
In American Surety Company v. Baldwin the Surety Company had chosen the state courts of Idaho as its forum for determining the issue of liability upon the supersedeas bond and had pursued its remedy to the Supreme Court. Then it sought to re-open the issue and inject a federal question by bringing an action to enjoin the enforcement of the judgment in the federal courts in Idaho. It was held that the doctrine of res judicata prevented a resort to an independent hearing in the federal courts in that State. American Surety Company v. Baldwin, (U.S. 1932) 53 Sup. …
Constitutional Law - Requirements Of Due Process In State Procedure
Constitutional Law - Requirements Of Due Process In State Procedure
Michigan Law Review
In American Surety Company v. Baldwin the Surety Company complained that the procedure in Idaho deprived it of a hearing upon its liability on a supersedeas bond. After judgment was given on the bond the Surety Company moved to vacate the order and the motion was granted. Baldwin took an appeal from this order to the Supreme Court of Idaho which reversed the trial court. The sole question raised by the motion was whether the trial court had jurisdiction to give judgment. Under the Idaho practice an appeal from the judgment of the court was the proper method to review …