U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, 1896

Andrews v. Thum

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Decided January 23, 1896 · Aldrich, Colt, Webb

71 F. 763; 18 C.C.A. 308; 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1649

Counsel

John M. Perkins, for appellants., Walter 35. Grant, for appellees., Frederick I *. Fish and William K. Richardson, for petitioner.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

Capital Transit Co. v. Public Utilities Commission of District of Columbia (D.C. Cir. 1954)
Reilly v. State (Conn. 1934)
Aetna Insurance Co. v. Hyde (Mo. 1931)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Whether restitution should be made of money paid in the progress of judicial procedure, where the interests of the parties defendant are or may be diverse, depends, oftentimes, on a question of fact. Perhaps a case might be so plain as to warrant this court in directing restitution in the court below, hut this is not such a case. This application should be m¿de to the circuit court We do not, in the present hearing, pass upon any question *764relating to the merits of such application. The judgment already entered in this cause is amended to read as follows.-, The decree of the circuit court is reversed, and the case remanded, with directions to dismiss the bill with costs. This court reserves to the defendants, John A. Andrews et ah, liberty to file in the circuit court a petition for restitution of the sum paid by them to the complainants under, the decree of the said circuit court of May 13, 1893, or to adopt other appropriate methods for presenting their claim for restitution, and to proceed thereon as that court may determine.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.