Coles v. Northrup

Fifth Circuit

Coles v. Northrup

66 F. 831, 14 C.C.A. 138, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2695

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 25, 1895

DocketNo. 340

StatusPublished

This text of 66 F. 831 (Coles v. Northrup) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coles v. Northrup, 66 F. 831, 14 C.C.A. 138, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2695 (5th Cir. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant contends that on the issue whether he held the property in question as owner in his own right, or as a tenant of the receiver, he was entitled to a trial by jury, and we think he was. He was a stranger to the equity case in which the receiver was appointed. He claimed as owner for 17 years under writings that more or less supported his claim; and, as to him, the proceeding to dispossess him of the property was, to all intents and purposes, a suit in ejectment. The decree appealed from is reversed. The cause is remanded, with instructions to dismiss the petition of the receiver, but without prejudice to his right, under the direction of the court, to institute proper proceedings at law to recover the property in controversy.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant contends that on the issue whether he held the property in question as owner in his own right, or as a tenant of the receiver, he was entitled to a trial by jury, and we think he was. He was a stranger to the equity case in which the receiver was appointed. He claimed as owner for 17 years under writings that more or less supported his claim; and, as to him, the proceeding to dispossess him of the property was, to all intents and purposes, a suit in ejectment. The decree appealed from is reversed. The cause is remanded, with instructions to dismiss the petition of the receiver, but without prejudice to his right, under the direction of the court, to institute proper proceedings at law to recover the property in controversy.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 F. 831, 14 C.C.A. 138, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coles-v-northrup-ca5-1895.