Bruce

Bruce v. Murray

Good Law
123 F. 366·2 Alaska Fed. 87·59 C.C.A. 494·1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4001
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 4, 1903No. 857California1,655 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Morrow, J.

after stating the facts as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

It is assigned as error that several causes of action were improperly united, that there was a defect of parties defendant in said third amended complaint, and that the court erred in entering a decree and judgment against the defendant Miner Bruce in the second, third, and fourth causes of action, and directing the marshal to sell *92 the steamer Fortune Hunter for the payment of said judgment.

The act of Congress entitled “An act making further provision for a civil government for Alaska, and for other purposes” (Act June 6, 1901, c. 786, 31 Stat. 321 ), provides in section 4, tit. 1, 31 Stat. 322 ( 48 U.S.C.A. § 101 and note), that “there shall be a court of general jurisdiction in civil, criminal, equity, and admiralty cases.” In section 699, tit. 2, 31 Stat. 443 , it is provided that the District Court is a court of general jurisdiction, civil and criminal, and also that it shall have admiralty jurisdiction. In section 1, tit. 2, 31 'Stat. 333, it is provided that “the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity, and the forms of all such actions and suits, is abolished, and there shall be but…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.