Gentry v. Grand View Mining & Smelting Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri

Gentry v. Grand View Mining & Smelting Co.

13 F. 544, 1882 U.S. App. LEXIS 2669

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri

DecidedSeptember 27, 1882

StatusPublished

This text of 13 F. 544 (Gentry v. Grand View Mining & Smelting Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gentry v. Grand View Mining & Smelting Co., 13 F. 544, 1882 U.S. App. LEXIS 2669 (circtedmo 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

Treat, D. J.

The only difficulty arises from the fact that a seeming defense and a counter-claim are intermingled. If the ore in question did not belong to the plaintiff in his own right, the defense -would be complete; but instead of so averring, the pleading leaves it uncertain as to what it is designed to charge the plaintiff’s relations thereto were. The counter-claim does not show that it arises from the same transaction; but, on the contrary, that the defendant is an assignee of a cause of action involving, it may be, an accounting between-the plaintiff and the assignee as to a long course of dealings.

The demurrer is sustained, with leave to defendant to file an additional answer and counter-claim, if they can be brought within the rules governing the same as here stated.

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

Treat, D. J.

The only difficulty arises from the fact that a seeming defense and a counter-claim are intermingled. If the ore in question did not belong to the plaintiff in his own right, the defense -would be complete; but instead of so averring, the pleading leaves it uncertain as to what it is designed to charge the plaintiff’s relations thereto were. The counter-claim does not show that it arises from the same transaction; but, on the contrary, that the defendant is an assignee of a cause of action involving, it may be, an accounting between-the plaintiff and the assignee as to a long course of dealings.

The demurrer is sustained, with leave to defendant to file an additional answer and counter-claim, if they can be brought within the rules governing the same as here stated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 F. 544, 1882 U.S. App. LEXIS 2669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gentry-v-grand-view-mining-smelting-co-circtedmo-1882.