Author Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1903 Excerpt:...out of the same fund and involving the settlement of the same transaction, and the distribution of the same estate (Moorman v. Crockett, 90 Va. 185, 17 S. E. 875). Intervention--Consolidation after decree.--Where during the pendency of several suits in equity to which the parties were different, strangers filed petitions to intervene, the appellate court reversed, a decree in the original suits and remitted the causes to the court with directions to consolidate them. Butler v. Strong, 3 App. Cas. (D. C.) 80. 29. Actions to foreclose mortgages against different pieces of property cannot be consolidated, although the parties are the same. Lockwood v. Fox, 8 Daly (N. Y.) 127; Selkirk v. Wood, 9 N. Y. Civ. Proc. 141; Bech v. Ruggles, 6 Abb. N. Cas. (N. Y.) 69; Kipp c.Delamater, 58 How. Pr. (N, Y.) 1.83. 30. An action of partition cannot be consolidated with a like action, the subjectmatter of which is situated in another county and one or more of the parties to which are not parties to or interested in the other action. Mayor v. Coffin, 00 N. Y. 312, II Abb. N. Cas. (N. Y.) 367, 64 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 230.; Actions of partition in which the plaintiffs and defendants are not identical cannot bo consolidated. Wooster Case, 12 N. Y. Suppl. 769. 34 N. Y. St. 577. 31. A court of equity will refuse to consolidate where the irterests involved pertain to separate and distinct parties, and the questions are presented jn such a confused and unsatisfactory condition as to require the court to separate the several matters at issue and to consider them in their respective relations to the several causes. Central Trust Co. V-Virginia, etc., Steel, etc., Co., 55 Fed. 769. 32. Day v. Postal Tel. Co., 66 Md. 354, 7 Atl. 608. 3. At Law And In Equity--a. In General. Althongh there a...