Stone v. Farmers' Bank

Supreme Court

Stone v. Farmers' Bank

174 U.S. 409, 19 S. Ct. 880

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided May 15, 1899·No. Nos. 385, 386·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice White,

after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

The decree below, so far as it granted the relief prayed as against the defendants other than the city of Georgetown and the county of Scott, is affirmed by a divided court. The decree, so far as it adjudicated against the complainant and in favor of the defendants the city of Georgetown and the county of Scott, those defendants not having been parties or privies to the judgments pleaded as res judicata, must be affirmed upon the authority of the decision in Citizens’ Savings Bank of Owensboro v. City of Owensboro and A. M. C. Simmons, Tax Collector, 173 U. S. 636.

And it is so ordered.

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

Mr. Justice White,

after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

The decree below, so far as it granted the relief prayed as against the defendants other than the city of Georgetown and the county of Scott, is affirmed by a divided court. The decree, so far as it adjudicated against the complainant and in favor of the defendants the city of Georgetown and the county of Scott, those defendants not having been parties or privies to the judgments pleaded as res judicata, must be affirmed upon the authority of the decision in Citizens’ Savings Bank of Owensboro v. City of Owensboro and A. M. C. Simmons, Tax Collector, 173 U. S. 636.

And it is so ordered.

Stone v. Farmers' Bank, 174 U.S. 409, 19 S. Ct. 880 (1899).

Pincite

174 U.S. 409 (Stone v. Farmers' Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related