Milot v. Keeling
Citations
- 5 Alaska 322
Syllabus
<p>Interpleader <&wkey;>S(2)—Parties.</p> <p>Where two or more persons, whose titles are connected by reason of one being derived from the other, or of both being derived from a common source, claim the same thing, debt, or duty by different or separate interests, from a third person, and he, not knowing to which of the claimants he ought of right to render the debt or duty, or to deliver the thing, fears he may he hurt by some of them, he may maintain a suit and obtain against them the remedy of interpleader.</p> <p><j&wkey;See same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that such an approach would result in “interlocutory appeal [becoming] the rule, rather than the exception, and [would] undermine the established policy of requiring finality before appellate review is ripe” (citing Caterpillar Inc., 519 U.S. at 74)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Tucker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.