Skip to content


Feibelman Vs. Packard - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number108 U.S. 14
AppellantFeibelman
RespondentPackard
Excerpt:
..... states for the district of louisiana syllabus a writ of error sued out by one of two or more joint defendants without a summons and severance or equivalent proceeding must be dismissed. mr. chief justice waite delivered the opinion of the court. moses feibelman and george voelker, as partners, sued the defendants in error to recover damages for the seizure of their partnership goods by packard, marshal of the united states for the district of louisiana. a judgment was rendered against them. their interests in the suit were joint, and the judgment affects them jointly and not separately. feibelman alone has brought this writ of error, and there has been no summons and page 108 u. s. 15 severance, or other equivalent proceeding. it follows that the.....
Judgment:
Feibelman v. Packard - 108 U.S. 14 (1882)
U.S. Supreme Court Feibelman v. Packard, 108 U.S. 14 (1882)

Feibelman v. Packard

Decided November 13, 1882

108 U.S. 14

I N ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Syllabus

A writ of error sued out by one of two or more joint defendants without a summons and severance or equivalent proceeding must be dismissed.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

Moses Feibelman and George Voelker, as partners, sued the defendants in error to recover damages for the seizure of their partnership goods by Packard, marshal of the United States for the District of Louisiana. A judgment was rendered against them. Their interests in the suit were joint, and the judgment affects them jointly and not separately. Feibelman alone has brought this writ of error, and there has been no summons and

Page 108 U. S. 15

severance, or other equivalent proceeding. It follows that the writ must be dismissed on the authority of Williams v. Bank of the United States, 11 Wheat. 414; Masterson v. Herndon, 10 Wall. 416; Simpson v. Greeley, 20 Wall. 152, and it is

So ordered.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //