Parker v. Julia Lain
Decision Date | 10 May 1915 |
Docket Number | No. 220,220 |
Citation | 59 L.Ed. 1051,237 U.S. 469,35 S.Ct. 632 |
Parties | M. V. B. PARKER, Plff. in Err., v. JULIA A. McLAIN, Executrix of the Estate of Carey McLain, Deceased |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Edward P. Garnett and Isaac O. Pickering for plaintiff in error.
Mr. W. R. Thurmond for defendant in error.
In a suit in the circuit court of Jackson county, Missouri, wherein the court had jurisdiction of the parties and the subject-matter, Carey McLain secured a decree against M. V. B. Parker for a considerable sum of money. The suit was brought and the decree rendered upon the theory that Parker had fraudulently induced McLain to join him in the purchase of certain property; that by falsely overstating the value of the property, the price at which it was being purchased, and the amount he was contributing to the price, Parker had secured from McLain several sums as the latter's share of the purchase money when in truth these sums greatly exceeded his share, and that in consequence McLain was entitled to surrender his interest in the property to Parker, and call upon him to refund what was paid to him. Before beginning the suit McLain executed and tendered to Parker appropriate deeds for the property, and when the suit was begun the deeds were brought into court and lodged with the clerk, to be disposed of by the decree when rendered. Following a recital of these matters and a finding that McLain had been damaged to the extent of his payments to Parker, the decree ordered that the former have and recover from the latter the amounts paid,—each being definitely stated,—with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of the decree, and directed that upon the satisfaction of the decree the deeds lodged with the clerk be delivered by him to Parker. The latter carried the case to the supreme court of Missouri, which affirmed the decree, and in doing so pointed out the nature of the suit in these words (229 Mo. 58, 87, 93, 129 S. W. 500):
After securing that decree, McLain brought an action thereon in the district court of Johnson county, Kansas, and during the pendency of the action died, leaving a will. The will was duly probated in Kansas, the state of his residence, and letters testamentary were issued in that state whereby his widow became his executrix. An ancillary administrator was also appointed by the probate court of Jackson county, Missouri. Thereafter the action in Kansas was revived in the name of the executrix, with the defendant's express consent, and in regular course a trial was had at which all questions of fact and law were resolved in the plaintiff's favor, save that it was held that the real party in interest was not the executrix, but the Missouri administrator, and that the action ought not to have been revived in the name of the executrix. Judgment was rendered for the defendant, and upon appeal to the supreme court of Kansas was reversed, with a direction to enter judgment for the plaintiff. 88 Kan. 717, 129 Pac. 1140, 88 Kan. 873, 131 Pac. 153. The present writ of error was then sued out by the defendant.
Our jurisdiction to review the judgment of the highest court of a state turns upon whether a Federal right was specially set up or claimed in that court and denied by its decision. Judicial Code, § 237 [36 Stat. at L. 1156, chap. 231, Comp. Stat. 1913, § 1214]. And to be effective for this purpose, the assertion of a Federal right must not be frivolous or wholly without foundation. It must at least have fair color of support, for otherwise an utterly baseless Federal right might be set up or claimed in almost any case, and the jurisdiction of this court invoked merely for purposes of delay. Hamblin v....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Attorney Gen. v. Pelletier
...a question of state law, the decision of which by the state court of last resort is binding upon this court.’ Parker v. McLain, 237 U. S. 469, 35 Sup. Ct. 632, 59 L. Ed. 1051;Moore v. Olsness, 245 U. S. 627, 38 Sup. Ct. 60, 62 L. Ed. 518, and cases there collected, dismissing writ of error ......
-
Attorney General v. Pelletier.
...anything other than a question of State law, the decision of which by the State court of last resort is binding upon this court." Parker v. McLain, 237 U.S. 469. Moore v. Olsness, 245 U.S. 627, and cases collected dismissing writ of error to State v. Taylor, 33 No. Dak. 76. Every rational p......
-
Samuel v. Page-Storms Drop Forge Co.
...v. Casey, 227 Mass. 46, 116 N. E. 541;Gasquet v. Lapeyre, 242 U. S. 367, 369, 37 Sup. Ct. 165, 61 L. Ed. 367;Parker v. McLain, 237 U. S. 469, 35 Sup. Ct. 632, 59 L. Ed. 1051), that the entry may be: Appeal ...
-
State v. Black
... ... McNeill, 173 Ala. 568, 56 So. 216, 38 L.R.A.,N.S., 924, ... Ann.Cas.1914A, 718; Parker v. McLain, Executrix, ... etc., 237 U.S. 469, 35 S.Ct. 632, 59 L.Ed. 1051, 28 ... U.S.C.A. § ... ...