Bartlett v. His Imperial Majesty the Sultan of Turkey

19 F. 346, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2047
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
DecidedFebruary 25, 1884
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 19 F. 346 (Bartlett v. His Imperial Majesty the Sultan of Turkey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bartlett v. His Imperial Majesty the Sultan of Turkey, 19 F. 346, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2047 (circtsdny 1884).

Opinion

Wallace, J.

The theory of this bill is that the complainants, as warehousemen, having been sued by the defendants severally in actions at law, to recover the possession of personal property in the custody of complainants as such warehousemen, are entitled to compel the defendants to interplead and relieve complainants from the burden of the several litigations at law. As part of the relief prayed for, the complainants seek to enjoin the defendants from their proceedings at law. Eor reasons which it is not now necessary to state, it may be doubtful whether the complainants can maintain their bill. The question now is, however, not whether the bill is good upon demurrer, but whether the complainants are entitled to secure the appearance of the defendants who cannot be served with process, because they cannot be found within the district by service of process upon the attorneys for the defendants in the suits at law in this district. This has long been recognized as good practice when the suit [347]*347in equity is brought to enjoin proceedings at law. As the subpoena has already been served upon the defendants’ attorneys, an order authorizing such service will be granted upon presenting a sufficient affidavit.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Union Assurance Society v. Buono
193 N.W. 827 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1923)
Johnson-Brown Co. v. Delaware, L. & W. R.
239 F. 590 (S.D. Georgia, 1917)
Shainwadd v. Davids
69 F. 701 (N.D. California, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 F. 346, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartlett-v-his-imperial-majesty-the-sultan-of-turkey-circtsdny-1884.