Horace Gray

Name: Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court
Author: Horace Gray

Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Horace Gray. It explores elements such as creditors, dispute and appeal.

Quotes from Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court (Horace Gray)

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ When a suit is brought by two or more plaintiffs, or against two or more defendants, or to recover or charge property owned or held by different persons, (which more often happens under the flexible and comprehensive forms of proceeding in equity and admiralty than under the stricter rules of the common low,) the question what is the matter in dispute becomes more difficult. Generally speaking, however, it may be said that the joinder in one suit of several plaintiffs or defendants, who might have sued or been sued in separate actions, does not enlarge the appellate jurisdiction ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ When the object of a suit is to apply property worth more to the payment of a debt for less than the jurisdictional amount, it is the amount of the debt, and not the value of the property, that determines the jurisdiction of this court. This is well illustrated by two cases, in one of which the appeal was taken by the creditor, and in the other by a mortgagee of the property. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ The suit is by the general creditors, only one of whose debts amounts to $5,000. The trustee and the preferred creditor appear as defendants only, file no cross bill, and ask no affirmative relief; and the decree sets aside the fraudulent conveyance so far only as it affects the plaintiffs' rights. The sole matter dispute, therefore, is between the defendants and each plaintiff as to the amount which the latter shall recover; and the motion to dismiss the appeal of the defendants as to all the plaintiffs except the one whose debt exceeds $5,000 must be granted. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ In Field v. Bigelow the whole amount of debts sued for was more, although each debt was less, than $2,000, and Mr. Justice NELSON said: 'No one of the three separate and distinct classes of creditors held a judgment exceeding $2,000. Neither judgment creditor, therefore, is entitled to an appeal to this court within the statute, as decided in the case of Seaver v. Bigelows.' In Myers v. Fenn the appeal was dismissed on the authority of Seaver v. Bigelows, as to creditors whose claims were severally less, but not as to those whose claims were severally more, than that sum. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ Upon the same principle, neither party can appeal from a decree upon a bill by a single plaintiff to enforce separate and distinct liabilities against several defendants, if the sum for which each is alleged or found to be liable is less than the jurisdictional amount. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ The reasons for this were summed up by Chief Justice TANEY as follows: 'The salvage service is entire; but the goods of each owner are liable only for the salvage with which they are charged, and have no common liability for the amounts due from the ship or other portions of the cargo. It is a separate and distinct controversy between himself and the salvors, and not a common and undivided one, for which the property is jointly liable.' Shields v. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ Alexander, 6 Pet. 143, upon a libel in admiralty against the owners of a vessel to recover seamen's wages, and an attachment of the proceeds of the vessel in the hands of assignees, the libelants obtained a decree for the payment out of those proceeds to them respectively of sums less than $1,000, but amounting in all to more than $2,000, and the assignees appealed. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Horace Gray, Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court

“ In equity, as in admiralty, when the sum sued for is one in which the plaintiffs have a joint and common interest, and the defendant has nothing to do with its distribt ion among them, the whole sum sued for is the test of the jurisdiction. ”

Horace Gray

Summary

Quotes from Gibson v. Shufeldt — Opinion of the Court (Horace Gray)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature