Pacific R.R. v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 01 January 1880 |
| Citation | 3 F. 772 |
| Parties | PACIFIC RAILROAD v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY and others. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
Glover & Shepley, for complainant.
Melville C. Day, for defendants.
Motion to vacate service of process.
The case in which the motion is made that we are about to decide is a suit brought in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Missouri, to set aside a decree and sale of the Missouri Pacific Railroad, made upon a proceeding to foreclose a mortgage upon that road. In addition to the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company and some persons who were also parties in that suit, the present bill makes parties of the purchasers at the sale, and several other individuals who were not parties to the former suit. Some of these are not citizens or residents of the state of Missouri, and have not been found within the district. The subpoenas were issued, and, in some cases, services had on these persons in the state of New York, and in the state of New Jersey; and service has also been made, without any previous authorization of the court, on the attorneys and solicitors in the former suit of some of the defendants in the present suit. The motion is to vacate and set aside all these services.
The argument, by which it is endeavored to support the service of process upon persons without the district, is that the present suit is one that is auxiliary to the former suit in which the decree of foreclosure was had; that it is so far merely a continuation of that suit; and that it is not a new and original suit in the sense that requires process to be restricted to those who have the requisite citizenship in ordinary suits in the federal courts. It may be conceded for the purposes of this motion that it is to a certain extent auxiliary to the original foreclosure suit, and that proceedings to set aside that decree, and to set aside also the sale of the railroad under that decree, can only be instituted in the circuit court of the United States in which that decree was rendered. But it also partakes so far of the nature of an original suit that the parties who are here contesting service of this process cannot be brought before the court by anything short of a subpoena in chancery; and cannot be compelled to answer and respond to the allegations of the present bill in any other mode than in the mode usually adopted in original chancery bills.
The argument that in such a case as this a subpoena in chancery can be issued so as to run beyond the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of the court, and be validly served beyond that jurisdiction, overlooks two important propositions:
1. It is of the essence of the power and jurisdiction of all courts that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lesnik v. Public Industrials Corporation
...hardly more than a passing reference to the venue statute by Mr. Justice Miller in requiring service of process in Pacific R. R. v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., C.C.E.D.Mo., 3 F. 772, which is generally approved on this point in Pacific R. R. v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 111 U.S. 505, 522, 4 S.Ct. 583......
-
Romaine v. Union Ins. Co.
...... U.S. v. Union Pac.R. Co., 98 U.S. 569, 579, (where. it is said an appearance was made 'de ... 422; S.C. 6 N.B.R. 509;. Hyslop v. Hoppock, 5 Ben. 447; Pacific R.R. v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 1 McCrary, 647; S.C. 3 F. 772;. Eaton ......
-
United States v. Parson
...Court effective beyond its territorial jurisdiction. Nor can it be served there. See 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 377, 503, 504; Pacific R. R. v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., C.C.Mo.1880, 3 F. 772; Mitchell v. Dexter, 1 Cir., 1917, 244 F. 926; Sugarman Iron & Metal Co. v. Morse Bros. Mach. & Supply Co., D. C.19......
-
West Virginia Oil & Gas Co. v. George E. Breece Lbr. Co.
...as to be subject to the rules in regard to the service of process which are laid down by Mr. Justice Miller in Pacific Railroad v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co., 3 F. 772, 1 McCrary 647. The bill, though an original bill in the chancery sense of the word, is a continuation of the former suit......