Oregon & Transcontinental Co. v. Northern Pac. R. Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Oregon & Transcontinental Co. v. Northern Pac. R. Co.

32 F. 428, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2775

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedAugust 20, 1887

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 32 F. 428 (Oregon & Transcontinental Co. v. Northern Pac. R. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Oregon & Transcontinental Co. v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 32 F. 428, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2775 (circtsdny 1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Lacombe, J.

The practice in this court touching applications, under the fifty-seventh rule, for leave to file supplemental bills, has always been liberal to the applicant. Rightly so, because the granting of such leave rests so largely in discretion that an unfavorable decision would practically debar the applicant from vindicating the sufficiency of his pleading, or the equity of his cause of action before the appellate court. This court will not, therefore, on such an application, proceed to try the cause, and to determine questions which may more appropriately be raised by demurrer. While in the case at bar, and upon the facts set forth in the supplemental bill, there may be grave doubts as to the complainant’s right to the relief prayed for in such bill, that issue will not lie tried on this motion.

Motion for leave to file supplemental bill granted.

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

Lacombe, J.

The practice in this court touching applications, under the fifty-seventh rule, for leave to file supplemental bills, has always been liberal to the applicant. Rightly so, because the granting of such leave rests so largely in discretion that an unfavorable decision would practically debar the applicant from vindicating the sufficiency of his pleading, or the equity of his cause of action before the appellate court. This court will not, therefore, on such an application, proceed to try the cause, and to determine questions which may more appropriately be raised by demurrer. While in the case at bar, and upon the facts set forth in the supplemental bill, there may be grave doubts as to the complainant’s right to the relief prayed for in such bill, that issue will not lie tried on this motion.

Motion for leave to file supplemental bill granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 F. 428, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2775, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oregon-transcontinental-co-v-northern-pac-r-co-circtsdny-1887.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack