United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 9023.
| Decision Date | 18 March 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 9023.,9023. |
| Citation | 154 F.2d 291 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES ex rel. MARCUS v. HESS et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Morris Feldstein, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellants.
Marvin D. Power, of Pittsburgh, Pa., (Margiotti & Casey, of Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellee Marcus.
J. Gregory Bruce, of Washington, D. C., (John F. Sonnett, Asst. Atty. Gen., Department of Justice, and Charles F. Uhl, U. S. Atty., of Pittsburgh, Pa., Joseph M. Friedman, Chief, War Frauds Civil Section, of Washington, D. C., on the brief), for appellee United States.
Before BIGGS and GOODRICH, Circuit Judges, and KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.
It is conceded by the appellants that if the federal rule relating to the release of joint tort-feasors be applied, the release of those defendants who contributed to the payment of a portion of the judgment, will not release the appellants, non-contributing defendants. The appellants contend that the Pennsylvania rule is applicable and that the release of one or more of the defendants, joint tort-feasors, will release all. Without conceding that the Pennsylvania rule is as the appellants assert, we entertain no doubt that the federal rule is applicable. The action at bar serves a federal purpose since it is a qui tam action brought pursuant to Sections 3490-3494 and 5438 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, 31 U.S.C.A. §§ 231-235, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 80, 82-86. See People of Porto Rico v. Rosaly y Castillo, 227 U.S. 270, 276, 33 S.Ct. 352, 57 L.Ed. 507; Garrett v. Moore-McCormack Co., 317 U.S. 239, 245, 63 S.Ct. 246, 87 L.Ed. 239; Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'Neil, 324 U.S. 697, 715, 65 S.Ct. 895. Accordingly the order of the District Court is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Klein
... ... See United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537, 542, 63 S.Ct. 379, 383, 87 L.Ed. 443; ... ...
-
Panichella v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
...or judgment does not release the noncontributing defendant upon whom liability is predicated under Federal Statute. United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 3 Cir., 154 F.2d 291. Another cogent reason exists for denying the applicability of the Warner release to Railroad. Assuming that Warner ......
-
Goldlawr, Incorporated v. Shubert
...398; Stella v. Kaiser, 2 Cir., 1955, 221 F.2d 115, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 835, 76 S.Ct. 71, 100 L.Ed. 745; United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 3 Cir., 1946, 154 F.2d 291; Barnes Coal Corp. v. Retail Coal Merchants Ass'n, 4 Cir., 1942, 128 F.2d 645. 3 Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceilin......
- United States ex rel. Monder v. Ragen