Hinsdale-Doyle Granite Co. v. Tilley

U.S. Circuit Court

Hinsdale-Doyle Granite Co. v. Tilley

10 F. 799

United States Circuit Court·Decided November 15, 1881·Published

Opinion

Blodgett, D. J.

I have no doubt that this is a proper proceeding against the city. It operates to place the complainant in the shoes of the creditor of the city, and requires the city to pay to the complainant. The court has jurisdiction to entertain a creditor’s bill of this kind, where a municipal corporation is a party defendant, and I think the demurrer should be overruled.

Let the demurrer to the bill by the city of Chicago be overruled

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

Blodgett, D. J.

I have no doubt that this is a proper proceeding against the city. It operates to place the complainant in the shoes of the creditor of the city, and requires the city to pay to the complainant. The court has jurisdiction to entertain a creditor’s bill of this kind, where a municipal corporation is a party defendant, and I think the demurrer should be overruled.

Let the demurrer to the bill by the city of Chicago be overruled

Hinsdale-Doyle Granite Co. v. Tilley, 10 F. 799 (uscirct 1881).

Pincite

10 F. 799 (Hinsdale-Doyle Granite Co. v. Tilley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.