Carter v. Smith

35 Fla. 169
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided January 15, 1895·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Malone, Circuit Judge,

(after stating the facts)-.

The primary question raised by the pleadings in this suit is whether the appellee stated in his bill such a case as entitled him to be made a co-plaintiff in another suit, to which he was not a party, and to participate in the relief prayed for in the bill in that suit.

The appellee neither stated in his bill the purposes- or objects of that other suit; nor the relief prayed for therein; nor his interest, if any, in the subject-matter thereof; nor whether his interest, if any, is adverse and conflicting or consistent with that of the plaintiff' therein; nor whether the plaintiff therein consents or objects to his being made a co-plaintiff therein. These matters are left to conjecture. In the absence of information touching them, we are unable to discover from the bill that the appellee is either a necessary or proper party to that other suit. The bill, therefore, is-so vague and indefinite that it does not state any case-upon which a court of equity will grant relief. Besides, there is no practice in equity which will authorize the court, upon the application of a person not a party to a suit, to compel a plaintiff to make such, person a co-plaintiff. Drake vs. Goodridge, 6 Blatchford, 151.

The decree appealed from is reversed.

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

Carter v. Smith, 35 Fla. 169 (Fla. 1895).

35 Fla. 169 (Carter v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Toomer v. Chancey
109 So. 641 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1926)
Durham v. Edwards
38 So. 926 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1905)
Doke v. Williams
45 Fla. 248 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1903)