Mogan v. Carter

• Decision Date: 07 March 1892
• Citation: 48 Minn. 501,51 N.W. 614
• Parties: MOGAN ET AL. v CARTER ET AL.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

48 Minn. 501

51 N.W. 614

MOGAN ET AL.vCARTER ET AL.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

March 7, 1892.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Chapter 57, Gen. Laws 1870, entitled “An act relating to parties to civil actions,” must be construed in conformity with the purpose, and subject thereof, as expressed by its title. So construed, it was not intended to give any new remedy or form of action against adverse claimants to real estate, but is simply a regulation of practice in respect to the joinder of parties, where there is one general right to be established common to all. MITCHELL, J., dissenting.

Appeal from district court, Hennepin county; SMITH, Judge.

Action by Patrick Mogan and others against Josephine A. Carter and others. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant Michael A. Harmon appeals. Reversed.

Akers & Lancaster, for appellant.

R. B. Forrest, for respondents.

VANDERBURGH, J.

This case involves the construction of chapter 57, Laws 1870, entitled “An act relating to parties to civil actions,” and provides for the joinder, as plaintiffs, of several parties, claiming under a common grantor, in actions to have the title of such grantor quieted as against parties claiming adversely to such title. We should not, perhaps, be adverse to giving this act the construction claimed for it by the plaintiff, as being intended to provide a new and convenient remedy against such adverse claimants in actions brought in the form in which this action is brought, wherein the nature of such adverse claim is “specifically set forth, in connection with the title of the plaintiffs' grantor, if such construction were permissible. But it is not. The act must be given a narrower construction, in conformity with the purpose and subject thereof as indicated by its title. So construed, it is simply a regulation or modification of a rule of practice already existing in equity, to enable a controversy involving questions common to several parties to be determined in one suit, in the nature of a “bill of peace.” The general object of bills of peace is to avoid a multiplicity of suits, and a large number of persons may be joined, where there is one general right to be established in favor of or against them. By this act, when two or more persons claim under the common grantor, any one may bring suit on behalf of himself and all others who may come in and become parties, etc. The complaint is not framed so as to bring the case within section 2, c. 75, Gen. St. 1878, in...