Born v. Schneider

• Decision Date: 08 February 1904
• Docket Number: 26,203.
• Citation: 128 F. 179
• Parties: BORN et al. v. SCHNEIDER et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

128 F. 179

BORN et al. v. SCHNEIDER et al.

No. 26,203.

United States Circuit Court, N.D. Illinois, Northern Division.

February 8, 1904

Chas B. Stafford, for complainants.

J. A. &amp H. R. Baldwin, E. A. Frost, Wilson, Moore & McIlvaine Willard & Evans, Flower, Vroman & Musgrave, and J. B. Leake for defendants.

Runnells & Burry, for interveners.

KOHLSAAT District Judge.

The bill herein was filed December 19, 1901, by the complainants, as stockholders and creditors of the National Bank of Illinois, against the defendants, as directors of said bank, seeking to hold said defendants liable for losses sustained by reason of their negligence as such directors. On December 14, 1901, Boyd et al. had filed their bill in this court against the same defendants, seeking to hold them for damages sustained by Boyd et al., as depositors and creditors, growing out of the alleged negligence of said defendants. On December 19, 1901, the Boyd bill was amended by adding the words 'in behalf of themselves and all other persons in like manner interested. ' To the last-named bill a demurrer was filed, which demurrer the court sustained on June 17, 1903, and ordered the bill dismissed for want of equity. On the same day the petitioners herein (all being parties complainants in the said Boyd suit) presented their motion for leave to file an intervening petition in this cause, whereupon the following order was entered:

'Now come James Boyd et al., by their solicitors, and enter their motion for leave to file their intervening petition herein, and thereupon said motion is continued for future consideration.'

No notice of the presentation of said motion was given. The next day the solicitors for Boyd et al. left with the clerk of this court a petition praying, among other things, 'that an order may be entered in this cause, making them parties complainant to this cause. ' This was indorsed: 'June 18, 1903. Motion for leave to file, and continued'-- and was presented without notice. On July 2, 1903, on motion of complainant herein, this cause was dismissed. A new term of court began July 6th. On July 15th Boyd et al. filed their petition and motion to set aside the order of dismissal of July 2d. On the same day the court entered an order finding that the petition then found in the files in said cause was by error marked by the clerk as having been filed therein on June 18, 1903, and that no leave to file the same had been given, and ordered that the same be stricken from the files, and also ordered that the motion of petitioners to set aside the order of July 2, 1903, dismissing this cause, be overruled and denied. The December term of the court began December 21, 1903. On January 8, 1904, Boyd et al. filed a petition herein for an appeal. It is difficult to determine from the ...