Marsh v. Nichols

Supreme Court

Marsh v. Nichols

120 U.S. 598

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMarch 14, 1887

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 120 U.S. 598 (Marsh v. Nichols) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Marsh v. Nichols, 120 U.S. 598 (1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

[600]*600This motion is denied. Although the suit was brought against Marsh, Le Fever, and Scott, Marsh and Le Fever alone answered the bill, and the decree was taken pro confesso against Scott. Marsh and Le Fever alone appealed from the Circuit Court of the county to the Supreme Court of the state, and from the decree in that court they alone obtained the allowance of a writ of error to this court. To such a writ Scott cannot make himself a party against the objection of Marsh and Le Fever, ,so as to control the case in this court.

Motion denied.

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

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

[600]*600This motion is denied. Although the suit was brought against Marsh, Le Fever, and Scott, Marsh and Le Fever alone answered the bill, and the decree was taken pro confesso against Scott. Marsh and Le Fever alone appealed from the Circuit Court of the county to the Supreme Court of the state, and from the decree in that court they alone obtained the allowance of a writ of error to this court. To such a writ Scott cannot make himself a party against the objection of Marsh and Le Fever, ,so as to control the case in this court.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 U.S. 598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marsh-v-nichols-scotus-1887.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack