The Federal Reporter. Volume 63 Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1894. Page: 4
xi, 1023 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
MaIrAL nasroTaMa, vol. 68.
the property in queop~O at the time mentioned in the decree, yet it left to
your orator nothing but the right of possession, which relief is wholly in-
adequate and incomplete; ,ad inequitable both to your orator and to the
respondent. And you orator alleges, as a' reason why said decree is de-
festlve and inequitable to both parties, that after the respondent took pos-
seession of said propr, is ,the latter partof the year 188 it immediately
commenced and gMde dows said land, and the whole thereof, from six to
twenty feet, and prepared t6' and did pave the street over the entire surface
of said property; *' +. making a complete pavement, * * * and,
be re doing such paving, made a sewer through the center of said street,
hF lugx the whole length of said property, * * * all of which cost the
q$4 j r7 adent from sixteen to twenty thousand dollars, the greater part
of W t asn assessed agitnst the property abutting on said street And your
oratbr' alleges that While the answer in the original suit discloses the fact
that said property had been paved, guttered, and otherwise improved, this re-
spondent44$g no correct knowledge of the nature, character, and value of
said improvements Intil long after said decree had been rendered, and never
knew Until quite lately that the cost of said improvement amounted to so
large a 'nm."
The fifth paragraph of the supplemental bill alleged in substance
that the city of Omaha had not paid the value of the land, as as-
sessed in the original decree, but had failed to do so, and that, if
the complainant attempted to recover possession of the property
by a suit in ejectment, he would be embarrassed in such proceeding
by the intervention of property owners whose lots abutted upon
said street. The complainant accordingly prayed that a supple-
mental decree might be entered, which should direct and require
the city to pay into court, for the use of complainant, the sum
of $6,000, and interest at the rate of 7 per cent from January 1,
1887, and that in default of making such payment a judgment might
be entered against the city for that amount. Thereafter, on the 5th
day of December, 1892, the city of Omaha entered a special ap-
pearance, and fied a motion to strike the supplemental complaint
from the files upon the ground that it was not a supplemental
bill, and that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the same
at that time. This motion was overruled, whereupon, on the 31st
day of January, 1893, the city demurred to the supplemental plead-
ing upon the ground that the pretended supplemental bill was
in no sense a pleading of that character, also upon the ground that
the court had no jurisdiction to entertain said bill, and also upon
the ground that it appeared from said supplemental bill that the
court had no jurisdiction in equity to grant the relief prayed for,
because -the complainant had an adequate remedy at law. The
ease was thereafter submitted to the court upon the supplemental
bill of complaint and the demurrer thereto. On the succeeding
22d day of December, 18903, the court rendered a decree in favor
of the complainant upon his supplemental bill, 'granting him the
relief therein prayed for. By the terms of this latter decree the
complainant was required within 20 days thereafter, to deposit
with the clerk of the circuit court, for the benefit of the respondent,
a deed transferring to the respondent all of the complainant's in-
te et in and to the strip of land heretofore referred to and de-
scribed in the original decree. A judgment was also entered in
favor of the complainant and against the city for the sum of $8,870,
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter. Volume 63 Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1894., legislative document, 1895; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc36388/m1/15/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.