 And the example by which he illustrates his definition is thus given: "The uniting in one bill several matters perfectly distinct and unconnected against one defendant, or the demand of several matters of a distinct and independent nature, against several...  Reports of Decisions in the Supreme Court of the United States - Stran 212avtor: United States. Supreme Court, Samuel Freeman Miller - 1874Celotni ogled - O knjigi
 | New Jersey. Court of Chancery - 1877 - 748 strani
...Campbell v. Mackay, a defendant must be able to say, to uphold a demurrer for multifariousncss, that "he is brought as a defendant upon a record, with a large portion of which, and of the case made by which, lie has no connection whatever." Neither objection is well taken. Both demurrers mast be overruled,... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Chancery, James William Mylne, Richard Davis Craig - 1837 - 748 strani
...multifariousness, as applied to a bill, is where a party is able to say he is brought as a De619 fendant upon a record, with a large portion of which, and...case made by which, he has no connection whatever. The form of demurrers for multifariousness strongly illustrates this distinction, at least as it used... | |
 | Joseph Story - 1838 - 660 strani
...But what is more familiarly understood by multifariousness, as applied to a Bill, is, where a party is brought as a defendant upon a record, with a large...of which, and of the case made by which, he has no connexion whatsoever. In such a case, he has a right to demur (and so the old form of demurrer was),... | |
 | John Sidney Smith - 1842 - 766 strani
...1836, VC in England, cited Story's Eq. Pi. 4 16, note. [c] By multifariousness in a bill, is meant, the improperly joining in one bill, distinct and independent matters, and thereby confounding them; as for example, the uniting in one bill, of several matters perfectly distinct and unconnected, against... | |
 | Joseph Story - 1844 - 970 strani
...But what is more familiarly understood by multifariousness, as applied to a Bill, is, where a party is brought as a defendant upon a record, with a large...and of the case made by which, he has no connection whatsoever. In such a case, he has a right to demur, and to state the evil of thus uniting distinct... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1851 - 860 strani
...different a character that the court will not permit them to be litigated in one record. 2d. Where a party is brought as a defendant upon a record, with a large...case made by which, he has no connection whatever. Ib. 54. In this case the claim set up and asserted by the bill consists of an equitable estate in a... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1859 - 738 strani
...practice of Courts of Chancery, it is best for all the parties. By multifariousness in a bill is meant the improperly joining in one bill, distinct and independent matters, and thereby confounding them; as, for example, the uniting in one bill several matters, perfectly distinct and unconnected, against... | |
 | Edmund Robert Daniell - 1846 - 848 strani
...persons applied to a bill, is, where a party is able to say he is brought as a by same trusdefendant upon a record, with a large portion of which, and of the tee*' case made by which, he has no connection whatever (A). Thus, where a bill was exhibited by the... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1885 - 952 strani
...multifariousness, he must be able to say that he is brought as a defendant to a record, with a large part of which, and of the case made by which, he has no connection whatever. The bill must contain several distinct and separate matters relating to individuals with whom he has... | |
 | Maryland. Court of Appeals, Richard W. Gill, Oliver Miller - 1850 - 596 strani
...of "so different a character, that the court will not permit them to be liquidated in one record ; a record with a large portion of which, and of the case made by which, he (the defendant, Henry) has no connection whatever." Surely, the defendant, Henry, has a right to insist,... | |
| |
