THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF KNOX, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
DAVID C. WALLACE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Wallace sued Knox County, Indiana to recover unpaid interest coupons attached to bonds the county had issued to a railroad company, and the county refused payment. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment in favor of Wallace, applying the same legal principles it had established in a related case (Aspinwall v. Board of Commissioners) involving the same defendants and similar facts.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a writ of error to the' Circuit Court of the TJnited States for the district of Indiana.
The suit was brought by Wallace against the board, upon several coupons, for instalments of interest which had been attached to certain bonds issued by the defendants to the Ohio and Mississippi R. R. Co. The coupons were owned by the plaintiff, and had been duly presented for payment, which was refused. The defendants plead the general issue, and six special pleas, to which there were replications, except the second and sixth pleas, to which there were demurrers.
The court sustained the demurrers. There were afterwards amendments and demurrers to pleadings not very intelligible in the record, and seem not to have been relied on by either party. The case was tried upon the general issue, and the facts disclosed upon the trial were substantially the same, mutatis mutandis^ as those which were proved or admitted in the previous case of Aspinwall and others against these same defendants. After the evidence was close.d, the defendants presented ten prayers to the court, upon each of which instructions were given. It is unnecessary to go through them; the questions involved have already been exámined in the' case above mentioned, and th,e result there arrived at affirms the judgment in this case.
Judgment affirmed.
Mr. Justice DANIEL dissented.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Orvis v. Higgins, 180 F.2d 537 (2d Cir. 1950)…excessively stretch credulity, see Old Colony Bondholders v. N. Y. N. H. R. Co., 161 F. 2d 413, 444. See also Kind v. Clark, 2 Cir., 161 F. 2d 36, 45; E. F. Drew & Co. v. Reinhard, 2 Cir., 170 F. 2d 679, 683; Chamberlain v. Ward, 21 How. 548, 569, 16 L.Ed. 211; List Pub. Co. v. Keller, C.C., 30 F. 772, 774; Vreeland v. Vreeland, 53 N.J.Eq. 387, 393, 32 A. 3, 5-6; cf. Sharpe v. Crispin, L.R. 1 P. 633, 620. 8a . Cf., e. g., Smith v. Davis, C.C., 34 F. 783, 784; Morison v. Dominion Nat. Bank, 169 Va. 191,…
-
The Munaires. the Hortensius, 1 F.2d 13 (2d Cir. 1924)…nd gets no assenting response, is in duty bound to stop, reverse, and, if necessary, come to a standstill, until the course of the other vessel has been ascertained with certainty, and the risk of collision removed. Chamberlain v. Ward, 21 How. 548, 16 L. Ed. 211; Border Line Transp. Co. v. Canadian Pac. Ry. Co. (D. C.) 262 Fed. 989. The officer in charge of the navigation of the Munaires was in doubt for at least ten minutes before the collision as to the navigation of the Hortensius. She did not reduce her…
-
G. B. Zigler Co. v. Barker Barge Line. THE Leta. THE Whitecastle. THE BBL-106, 167 F.2d 676 (5th Cir. 1948)…Sawyer v. McDonald, 5 Cir., 165 F. 2d 426; The Manitoba, 122 U.S. 97, 7 S.Ct. 1158, 30 L.Ed. 1095; The New York, 175 U.S. 187, 20 S.Ct. 67, 44 L.Ed. 126; The West Hartland, 9 Cir., 2 F. 2d 834. See also Chamberlain v. Ward, 21 How. 548, at page 567, 16 L. Ed. 211.…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence