Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: multifariousness Sorted by: old Page 1 of about 1,538 results (0.010 seconds)

1840

Rhode Island Vs. Massachusetts

Court : US Supreme Court

..... give it effect in the sense it is relied on as a bar, unless the defense set up is double. it is insisted the plea is multifarious because it relies on two defenses: first the compacts, and second the possession and occupation of the territory claimed by the plaintiff for more than a ..... would set up two defenses. but where the facts, however numerous, all conduce to establish one point, as in the plea under consideration, it is not multifarious. story's eq.pl. 499. this plea goes to the whole bill, and the matter in bar is clearly and distinctly averred. these averments must be ..... . and if so, it would seem irresistibly to follow that the accord and compromise, and the title by prescription, united in this plea, render it multifarious, and that it ought to be overruled on that account. we have carefully avoided expressing any opinion upon the merits of this controversy, and have confined ..... case of beachcroft v. beachcroft, where it had been held that the plea of a release, with an averment that it had been acted upon, was multifarious, expressed his doubts of that decision upon the ground that the release was effectual without being acted upon, and the latter averment might have been rejected ..... the same plea, contrary to the established rules of pleading. the accord and compromise, and the title by prescription united in this plea, render it multifarious, and it ought to be overruled on this account. this case was before the court at january term, 1838. the state of rhode island in 1832 .....

Tag this Judgment!

1844

Gaines Vs. Chew

Court : US Supreme Court

..... with the settlement of the accounts growing out of the administration. i therefore concur in answering the first question -- that the bill is not multifarious. the third question presents no difficulty as to the executors; they are properly sued in chancery for distribution beyond doubt, and so i imagine ..... v. mackay, 7 sim. 564, and in 1 myl. & c. 603, "to lay down any rule, applicable universally, or to say, what constitutes multifariousness, as an abstract proposition, is, upon the authorities, utterly impossible." every case must be governed by its own circumstances, and as these are as diversified as ..... a special demurrer. on the argument of the demurrer, the opinions of the judges were opposed on the following points: 1. is the bill multifarious? and have the complainants a right to sue the defendants jointly in this case. 2. can the court entertain jurisdiction of this case, without probate ..... filed against the executors of an estate and all those who purchased from them, is not, upon that account alone, multifarious. under the louisiana law, the court of probate has exclusive jurisdiction in the proof of wills, which includes those disposing of real as well as ..... court of the united states for the eastern district of louisiana syllabus it is impossible to lay down any general rule as to what constitutes multifariousness in a bill in equity. every case must be governed by its own circumstances, and the court must exercise a sound discretion. a bill .....

Tag this Judgment!

1845

Oliver Vs. Piatt

Court : US Supreme Court

..... chew, 2 how. 619, 43 u. s. 642 , that it is page 44 u. s. 412 impracticable to lay down any rule, as to what constitutes multifariousness, as an abstract proposition; that each case must depend upon its own circumstances; and much must necessarily be left, where the authorities leave it, to the sound discretion ..... distinct in the tracts conveyed by oliver to the michigan university. we are of opinion that the bill is in no just sense multifarious. it is true that it embraces the claims of both the companies; but their interests are so mixed up in all these transactions, that entire justice ..... it can furnish no ground for any denial of the relief which the case otherwise requires. another objection urged at the argument is that the bill is multifarious in uniting the trust property owned by the piatt company and the port lawrence company in one bill, as the interests of each are separate and ..... be left to the discretion of the court. the objection of multifariousness can be taken by a party to the bill only by demurrer, or plea, or answer, and cannot be taken at the hearing of the cause. ..... the property to which the warranty is attached by descent, but as a purchaser thereof. whether a bill in equity is open to the objection of multifariousness or not must be decided upon all the circumstances of the particular case. no general rule can be laid down upon the subject, and much must .....

Tag this Judgment!

1847

Nelson Vs. Hill

Court : US Supreme Court

..... necessity for further previous page 46 u. s. 134 proceedings at law; that the bill and amended bill of the complainants were not exceptionable for multifariousness; that the decree of the circuit court dismissing those bills for either of the causes assigned for the demurrer is erroneous. the decree is therefore ..... the bill, the reason for the exemption designed by the rule no longer exists, and although at the hearing the court may, sponte sua, make an objection for multifariousness, it is no longer in the power of a party, after answer, to do so. see whaley v. dawson, 2 sch. & l. 370, and ..... would be difficult to deduce anyone objection rather than another; but could this assignment be understood as pointing specifically to the structure of the bills as multifarious, from the number or relative position of the complainants, it is certain that no valid exception could on either of those grounds be sustained. these ..... the estate of the deceased. where there were two mercantile firms and some of the members common to both, a creditor's bill was not multifarious when filed against the personal representatives of two of the deceased partners of the two firms and also against the surviving partner of one of the ..... syllabus it is not irregular for two mercantile firms to unite as complainants in equity in a creditor's bill. an objection that a bill is multifarious must be made before answer, and can be tested only by the structure of the bill itself. the creditor of a partnership may, at his .....

Tag this Judgment!

1855

Shields Vs. Thomas

Court : US Supreme Court

..... upon a record with a large portion of which, and of the case made by which, he has no connection whatever." justice story, in his compilation upon equity pleading, defines multifariousness in a bill to mean "the improperly joining in one bill distinct and independent matters, and thereby confounding them." and the example by which he illustrates his definition is thus ..... work on chancery practice vol. 1, 384, quoting from lord cottenham, says: "it is impossible, upon the authorities, to lay down any rule or abstract proposition as to what constitutes multifariousness which can be made universally applicable. the cases upon the subject are extremely various, and the court, in deciding upon them, seems to have considered what was convenient in particular ..... equity pleadings, with reference to which, whilst as a rule it is universally admitted, there has existed less of certainty and uniformity in application than has attended this relating to multifariousness. this effect, flowing, perhaps inevitably, from the variety of modes and degrees of right and interest entering into the transactions of life, seems to have led to a conclusion ..... the united states, irrespective of the justice or regularity of the proceedings in the state court. this objection is that the bill filed in the district court of iowa is multifarious by embracing in one suit interests and causes of action in themselves separate and disconnected, and therefore such as it was improper to include in one bill. there is .....

Tag this Judgment!

1860

Fitch Vs. Creighton

Court : US Supreme Court

..... . craig, 603, said to lay down any rule applicable universally or to say what constitutes multifariousness as an abstract proposition is, upon the authorities, utterly impossible. page 65 u. s. 164 every case must be governed by its circumstances, and as these are as diversified as ..... the name of the city or its appointee. the complainant is the appointee for this purpose, and his right is too clear to admit of controversy. this bill is not multifarious; the assessments were assessed on the lots by the foot front, and all against the same defendant. lord cottenham, in campbell v. mackay, 7 simon 564 and in mylne v ..... power of the state, but from the laws of the united states. it was not necessary to make the contractor who had sold out a party, nor was the bill multifarious because it claimed to enforce the liens upon several lots. it was a bill filed on the equity side of the court by creighton, a citizen of iowa, against fitch .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1876 (PC)

Treeporasoondery Dossee Vs. Debendronath Tagore

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1877)ILR2Cal45

..... came on to be heard before me in settlement of issues, and debendro and ganendro set up three principal grounds why the suit should be dismissed: 1st, that it is multifarious; 2nd, that the plaintiff has no right to sue in respect of any of the matters complained of by her; and 3rd, that the plaintiff is barred by limitation and ..... plaintiff had, in fact, any right or interest under the deed of settlement, and having regard to the wider and more liberal view latterly taken with respect to objection for multifariousness, as shown in the cases of pointon v. pointon l.r. 12 eq. 537 and coates v. legard l.e. 19 eq. 56. i should not have been disposed to .....

Tag this Judgment!

1877

Briges Vs. Sperry

Court : US Supreme Court

..... awarding partition was proper. 2. that if there is anything in the allegations which concern the partnership which introduces another matter, the objection should have been taken by demurrer for multifariousness. this action was commenced by the complainant, who is a citizen of california, in the district court of the fifth judicial district for the county of san joaquin in that ..... as sufficient for a partition suit. if there is anything in the allegations which concern the partnership which introduces another matter, the objection should have been taken by demurrer for multifariousness. it is not fatal to the bill on appeal. the only question contested in the case on the evidence was whether the land could be partitioned in kind without serious .....

Tag this Judgment!

1877

Dial Vs. Reynolds

Court : US Supreme Court

..... law, a court of the united states cannot enjoin a party from proceeding in a state court. 2. a bill of foreclosure is bad for misjoinder of parties and for multifariousness where persons are made defendant thereto who claim title adversely to the mortgagor and the complainant and the latter seeks in that suit to litigate and settle his rights. the ..... mortgagee a party and litigate and settle his rights in that case. barbour, parties in equity 493, and the cases there cited. this case was one of fatal misjoinder and multifariousness, and the proper course for reynolds was to demur. story, eq.pl., sec. 284 b . the complainants not having amended by striking out so much of the bills as related .....

Tag this Judgment!

1877

Dewing Vs. Perdicaries

Court : US Supreme Court

..... every thing involved in the controversy. this saved time, expense, circuity of proceedings, perhaps a multiplicity of suits, and promoted the ends of justice. there is clearly no misjoinder or multifariousness in the bill. there are cases in which a corporation having refused to do its duty by suing to avert a threatened wrong, a stockholder was permitted to intervene in ..... , law rep. 1 scotch app. 145. that question would be alien to those arising and proper to be decided in this case. the litigation as to that subject would be multifarious. the rights and claims of all the parties before us, as respects both the corporation and the original stockholders, may therefore well be disposed of in this case. we think .....

Tag this Judgment!


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