Summary

Louis Brandeis Pease v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Company…

For, as this court has said, sureties 'become quasi parties to the proceedings, and subject themselves to the jurisdiction of the court, so that summary judgment may be rendered on their bonds.' Babbitt v. Finn (Babbitt v. Shields) 101 U.S. 7, 15, 25 L. ed. 820, 822. The objection that a court of equity has no jurisdiction because there is an adequate remedy at law on the bond is not well taken. A court of equity, having jurisdiction of the principal case, will completely dispose of its incidents and put an end to further litigation.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis Pease v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Company…

There is also the further provision in the article that 'the existence of every corporation may be continued for three years after its dissolution from whatever cause, for the purpose of enabling those charged with the duty to settle upon its affairs.' The People's Light Company, which takes this appeal and gives bond for its successful prosecution, is hardly in a position to assert that it is nonexistent and incapable of maintaining and defending pending suits.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis Pease v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Company…

Although the adoption of state procedure is not obligatory upon the Federal courts when sitting in equity, they have frequently rendered summary judgment against sureties on appeal bonds. See cases in the margin. [2] Some of the district courts, by formal rule of court require the bond to contain an express agreement that the court may, upon notice to the sureties, proceed summarily against them in the original action or suit.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature