East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad v. Southern Telegraph Co.

125 U.S. 695, 8 S. Ct. 1391, 31 L. Ed. 853, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 1956
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided April 9, 1888·No. 107·Published·Cited by 18 cases

Opinion

Me. Justice Miller,

on the 9th of April, 1888, delivered the opinion of the court.

It was suggested by a letter from counsel employed on one side of this suit that his party had sold out the interest which it had to the other party, who was prosecuting it now and was dommus litis on both sides. • A ruling was made some time ago, before the death of the late Chief Justice, in effect "that there was sufficient evidence to that effect to require the case to be dismissed unless the ‘side now prosecuting it for decision would show satisfactory evidence that it was a bona fide suit. ' Two attempts have been made, and we are agreed in the opinion that they are both failures and that the 'original order should now be carried out, dismissing the case on the grounds set forth in the opinion of the Chief Justice, delivered at the time.

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

East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad v. Southern Telegraph Co., 125 U.S. 695, 8 S. Ct. 1391, 31 L. Ed. 853, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 1956 (1888).

125 U.S. 695 (East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad v. Southern Telegraph Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Aguayo
80 P.R. 534 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1958)
Estado Libre Asociado v. Aguayo
80 P.R. Dec. 552 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1958)
Hamburg-American Line v. United States
168 F.2d 47 (First Circuit, 1948)
KFAB Broadcasting Co. v. Sorensen
290 U.S. 599 (Supreme Court, 1933)
Schmertz Wire Glass Co. v. Western Glass Co.
178 F. 973 (U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois, 1909)
State v. Lambert
43 S.E. 176 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1902)
Western Electric Co. v. Anthracite Telephone Co.
113 F. 834 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania, 1902)
Hatfield v. King
184 U.S. 162 (Supreme Court, 1901)
Western Electric Co. v. Anthracite Tel. Co.
100 F. 301 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania, 1900)
Weaver v. Kelly
92 F. 417 (Fifth Circuit, 1899)
Mills v. Green
159 U.S. 651 (Supreme Court, 1895)
Arnold v. Woolsey
54 F. 268 (Eighth Circuit, 1893)