페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

detail the facts which support the charge, but there being no specific charge of fraud or perjury.36

It has been held that the Federal court has no power to amend a declaration in a State court.37 Nor after the expiration of the term to amend the proceedings in its own court so as to change the name of the person to whom the certificate was issued; when no contemporary record shows a mistake.38 That no court can after the term enter nunc pro tunc an order of naturalization when no entry or memorandum appears in the record or files made at the term, when the judgment is directed to take effect.39 But that it may, pending proceedings to cancel the certificate, amend a declaration so as to correct a mistake made in good faith concerning the sovereignty to which the applicant then owed allegiance.40

The naturalized citizen is not entitled to a trial by jury.41 § 151c. Creditors' bills after executions have been returned unsatisfied. A bill may be filed by a judgment creditor to apply to the satisfaction of his debt assets which cannot be reached by an execution.1 A previous judgment is required in order to preserve the defendant's constitutional right to a trial by jury if he disputes the creditor's demand.2

3

Such bills have been sustained when filed by a judgment creditor to apply to the satisfaction of his debt an interest which his debtor may hold in a patent or copyright, or in a license to use a patented invention; by a judgment creditor against a city for an accounting of taxes collected by it which

36 U. S. v. Rockteschell, 208 Fed. 530.

37 U. S. v. Viaropulos, 221 Fed. 484, 492.

38 U. S. v. Viaropulos, 221 Fed. 484, 492; re Perkins, 204 Fed. 350; re O'Sullivan (Mo. App., 1909), 117 S. W. 651.

39 Gagnon v. U. S., 193 U. S. 451, 48 L. ed. 745, overruling; re Christern, 43 N. Y. Sup. Ct., 11 (J. & S.) 523, 56 How. Pr. 8. See U. S. v. Stoller, 180 Fed. 910.

40 U. S. v. Viaropulos, 221 Fed. 484, 492.

41 Luria v. U. S., 231 U. S. 9, 17, 34 Sup. Ct. 10, 58 L. ed. 101, affirming, 184 Fed. 643.

§ 151c. 1 Angell v. Draper, 1 Vern. 399; Scottish Am. Mtg. Co. v. Follansbee, 14 Fed. 125.

2 U. S. v. Seward Peninsula Ry. Co., C. C. A., 203 Fed. 963; Williams v. Adler-Goldman Commission Co., C. C. A., 227 Fed. 374, affirming, 211 Fed. 530.

3 Ager v. Murray, 105 U. S. 126, 26 L. ed. 942. See Maitland v. Gibson, 79 Fed. 136.

4 Matthews V. Green, 19 Fed. 649.

had been pledged for the payment of complainant's demand.5 To enforce a decree for the payment of money, at least when 'made by another court of equity. To enforce the payment of alimony directed to be paid in the final judgment or decree of a State court.7

By a creditor, whose claim has not been reduced to judg ment, against an insolvent corporation for the appointment of a receiver and the marshaling and distribution of its assets; when the corporation waives the objection that his claim has not been reduced to judgment. Or when the charter of the corporation has expired, or because of a sheriff's sale of its property and franchises, the officers last elected have become trustees to distribute its assets.9

Under ordinary circumstances a creditor cannot file a bill in equity to apply assets to the payment of his debt alone, unless he has obtained a judgment for his claim in a court of the same State or judicial district, and had the return of an execution issued thereon unsatisfied.10

The United States cannot sue in equity to recover a tax until it has obtained judgment against the taxpayer 11 unless a statute gives the Government a lien upon the property, 12 or under special circumstances.

A creditor who has not reduced his claim to judgment cannot collect his claim by a suit in equity on showing that the debtor is insolvent and has no property which can be reached

5 City of New Orleans v. Fisher, C. C. A., 91 Fed. 574.

6 Shields v. Thomas, 18 How. 253, 262, 15 L. ed. 368, 372. But see Tilford v. Oakley, Hempst. 197.

7 Barber v. Barber, 21 How. 582, 16 L. ed. 226; Knapp v. Knapp, 59 Fed. 641; Israel v. Israel, 130 Fed. 237; Johnson v. Johnson, 13 Fed. 193; Bowman v. Bowman, 30 Fed. 849.

8.Re Metropolitan Railway Receiv ership, 208 U. S. 90, 52 L. ed. 403; Fink v. Patterson, 21 Fed. 602.

9 Am. Ice Co. v. Pocono Spring

Water Ice Co., 165 Fed. 714. But see Boomer v. Rose, 244 Fed. 307.

10 Case v. Beauregard, 99 U. S. 119, 25 L. ed. 370; Smith v. Railroad Co., 99 U. S. 398, 25 L. ed. 437; Walser v. Seligman, 13 Fed. 415; Swan L. & C. Co. v. Frank, 148 U. S. 603, 37 L. ed. 577; Hollins v. Brierfield, C. & I. Co., 150 U. S. 371, 37 L. ed. 1113; Maxwell v. M'Daniels, C. C. A., 184 Fed. 311. 11 U. S. v. Seward, Peninsula Ry. Co., C. C. A., 203 Fed. 963.

12 U. S. v. Capital City Dairy Co., 252 Fed. 900.

by legal process.13 Nor in the absence of statutory authority because the debtor is about to make a fraudulent transfer of his property.14 Such a bill may be maintained, however, by the creditor before he has reduced his claim to judgment in order to enforce a right given him by a State statute.15 It has been held that such a bill may be maintained in Virginia, by a creditor of an insolvent firm which is disposing of its assets in fraud of creditors, filed on behalf of the other creditors as well as himself, praying the appointment of a receiver, an injunction against any interference by others with the firm assets and the distribution of those assets among the creditors equally.16 A previous judgment and return of execution unsatisfied is not required where the creditor sues to enforce a trust or equitable right or lien.17

Under ordinary circumstances the creditor cannot sue in equity an executor to collect his claim from the estate before he has obtained a judgment at law.18 An order of a court of probate directing the executor to pay a claim may be enforced by a bill in equity against the executor,19 but not against his sureties until a judgment at law has been obtained against them.20 When a discovery of assets from the executor is required the creditor may sue in equity for such discovery and the payment of his debt without obtaining a previous judgment at law.21

Where the creditor's attorney admitted that the debt was due the creditor and it appeared that debtor had no property anywhere subject to execution and had left the State where his equitable assets were located, a creditor's bill without the previous entry of a judgment was sustained.22 A bill may be filed

13 Walser v. Seligman, 13 Fed. 415; Am. Creosote Works v. C. Lembcke & Co., 165 Fed. 809.

14 Am. Creosote Works v. C. Lembeke & Co., 165 Fed. 809. But see Murray v. Sioux Alaska Min. Co., C. C. A., 239 Fed. 818.

15 Murray v. Sioux Alaska Min. Co., C. C. A., 239 Fed. 818.

16 Fink v. Patterson, 21 Fed. 602. 17 Case v. Beauregard, 101 U. S. 688, 690, 25 L. ed. 1004; Merchants'

[blocks in formation]

A

by a creditor of decedent to set aside a fraudulent conveyance of his estate made after his death by the order of court.23 judgment creditor in a foreign jurisdiction cannot ordinarily sue to recover equitable assets until he has recovered a judgment in the district where the suit is brought.24 In such a case where execution has been issued in the jurisdiction where the judg ment was recovered and the bill shows that he cannot be served with process within a jurisdiction where he possesses assets that cannot be reached by attachment, a bill in equity will be maintained without a previous judgment in the jurisdiction where it is filed.25

It is not enough for such a bill to show that the defendant is a foreign corporation.26 It must deny that it is transacting business within the State and aver that it has no agent there upon whom process can be served.27 It has been held that the judgment debtor is not an indispensable party to such a suit to set aside a fraudulent conveyance by him.28

It has been doubted whether a Federal court will entertain a creditors bill founded upon the judgment of a State court within the district. But the better opinion is that such a bill may be maintained.29

When a judgment creditor has an adequate remedy at law, a bill in equity for the same relief cannot ordinarily be maintained. Thus it was held that that a judgment creditor of a national bank cannot sue in equity to compel the receiver of the bank to recognize his judgment and to enjoin the receiver from refusing such recognition; 30 because he has an adequate remedy by an action at law in the Federal court against the receiver upon the judgment of the State court against the bank.31 But that the fact that he might have collected his

Commission Co., C. C. A., 227 Fed. 374, affirming, 211 Fed. 530.

23 Johnson v. Waters, 111 U. S. 640, 28 L. ed. 547.

24 Nat. Tube Works Co. v. Ballou, 146 U. S. 517, 13 Sup. Ct. 165, 36 L. ed. 1070.

25 Bank of Commerce and Trusts v. McArthur, C. C. A., 256 Fed. 84. 26 Edward Hines Lumber Co. v. Bowers, C. C. A., 238 Fed. 782.

27 Bank of Commerce and Trusts v. McArthur, C. C. A., 256 Fed. 84. 28 Ibid.

29 Davis v. Davis, 65 Fed. 380. 30 Bacon v. Harris, 62 Fed. 99; Bidwell v. Huff, 103 Fed. 362; Feidler v. Bartleson, C. C. A., 161 Fed. 30.

31 Denton v. Baker, 79 Fed. 189,

judgment by garnishee process does not deprive him of the right to seek relief in equity.82 It was said that a receiver, assignee in bankruptcy, or assignee under a voluntary general assignment, each of whom represents creditors as well as the debtor, cannot maintain a bill to enforce a collateral obligation given to a creditor or to a body of creditors by a third person for the payment of the debts of the insolvent.33

§ 151d. Bills for accountings. Equity will entertain a bill to compel an accounting by persons standing in a trust relation to the plaintiff, and by those against whom an action for account render would lie at common law, namely, guardians in socage, bailiffs, receivers, and merchants in their dealings with each other, but not otherwise, unless the accounts are mutual, or very complicated and intricate, or the accounting is supplemental to some other equitable relief."

32 Feidler v. Bartleson, 161 Fed. 30.

33 Jacobson v. Allen, 12 Fed. 454. § 151d. 1 Pacific R. of Mo. v. Atlantic & Pac. R. Co., 20 Fed. 277; Fowle v. Lawrason, 5 Pet. 494, 502, 8 L. ed. 204, 206; Littlefield v. Perry, 21 Wall. 205, 22 L. ed. 577; Providence Min. & Mill Co., v. Nocholson, C. C. A., 178 Fed. 29; Morris & Co. v. Whitley, C. C. A., 183 Fed. 764.

2 Cited with approval by C. C. A. of the Fifth Circuit, Morris & Co. v. Whitley, C. C. A., 183 Fed. 764, 765; Mitchell v. Manufacturing Co., 2 Story, 648; Linson v. Hutton, 98 U. S. 79, 25 L. ed. 66; Fowle v. Lawrason, 5 Pet. 494, 502, 8 L. ed. 204, 206; U. S. v. National Bank, 73 Fed. 379.

3 Bispham's Equity, § 481; 1 Co. Litt. 90 b; 1 Co. Litt. 172 a; Bacon's Abr., Account, A.; Buller's Nisi Prius, 127; Earl of Devonshire's Case, 11 Coke, 89.

4 Root v. Railway Co., 105 U. S. 189, 26 L. ed. 975; Consol. Safety Valve Co. v. Ashton Valve Co., 26

Fed. 319; Lord v. Whitehead, etc.,
Mach. Co., 24 Fed. 801; Gunn v.
Brinckley Car Works & Mfg. Co.,
66 Fed. 382.

5 Tenno v. Primrose, 116 Fed. 49; Fechteler et al. v. Palm Bros. & Co., C. C. A., 133 Fed. 462.

6 Cited with approval by Judge Hazel, Harvey v. Sellers, 115 Fed. 757, 758, and by C. C. A. of the Fifth Circuit, Morris & Co. v. Whitley, C. C. A., 183 Fed. 764, 765. Kilbourn v. Sutherland, 130 U. S. 505, 32 L. ed. 1005; John Crossley Sons v. New Orleans, 20 Fed. 352; Pacific R. Co. v. Atlantic & Pac. R. Co., 20 Fed. 277; Gunn v. Brinckley C. W. & Mfg. Co., C. C. A., 66 Fed. 382; Baker v. Biddle Bald. 394; Blakeley v. Briscoe, Hempst. 114; Hattiesburg Lumber Co. v. Herrick, C. C. A., 212 Fed. 834. (Where relief obtainable at common law was also prayed.) But see Lord v. Whitehead, etc., Mach. Co., 24 Fed. 801; Adams v. Bridgewater Iron Co., 26 Fed. 324; Hagenbeck v. Hagenbeck Zoo A. Co., 59 Fed. 14. Hattiesburg Lumber Co. V.

« 이전계속 »