History
  • No items yet
midpage
Drexel v. Berney
14 F. 268
U.S. Circuit Court for the Dis...
1882
Check Treatment
Wallace, C. J.

The facts disclosed by the bill will avail the complainant as a defense at law to the action which is sought to be restrained by the bill. They do not show a defense of an equitable character distinctively. Even if formerly the complainant might have been entitled to a discovery, now that parties can be examined in the .same manner as other witnesses, at the instance of the adverse party, there is no necessity for such relief. Heater v. Erie R. Co. 9 Blatchf. 316; Markey v. Mut. Benefit L. Ins. Co. 3 Law & Eq. Rep. (1st Cir.) 647. The jurisdiction of a court of equity in this regard rests upon the inability of the common-law courts to obtain or compel the testimony sought, and when it can be obtained by the process of the latter it is an abuse of the powers of chancery to interfere. Brown v. Swan, 10 Pet. 497.

The demurrer is allowed.

Case Details

Case Name: Drexel v. Berney
Court Name: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
Date Published: Nov 17, 1882
Citation: 14 F. 268
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.