Portland Gold Mining Co. v. Stratton's Independence, Ltd.

Citations

• 158 F. 63
• 16 L.R.A.N.S. 677
• 1907 U.S. App. LEXIS 3974

Syllabus

<p>Judgment — Estoppel—Actions of Tort — Exoneration of Immediate Actor.</p> <p>The general rule that one may not have the benefit of a judgment as an estoppel, unless he would have been bound by it had it been the other way, is subject to recognized and rational exceptions, one of which is that in actions of tort, such as trespass, if the defendant’s responsibility is necessarily dependent upon the culpability of another, who was the immediate actor, and who, in an action against him by the same plaintiff for the same act, has been adjudged not culpable, the defendant may have the benefit of that judgment as an estoppel, even though he would not have been bound by it had it been the other way.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent Dig. vol. 30, Judgment, § 1146.]</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>