Skip to main content
· 1/3/1899

Sonnentheil v. Christian Moerlein Brewing Co.

Citations

  • 172 U.S. 401
  • 19 S. Ct. 233
  • 43 L. Ed. 492
  • 1899 U.S. LEXIS 1384

Syllabus

<p>A suit against a marshal of the United States, for acts done in his official capacity, is a suit arising under the laws of the United States; and the joinder of another defendant, jurisdiction over whom is dependent upon diversity of citizenship, does not deprive the .marshal of rights he would otherwise possess.</p> <p>In an action assailing the validity of an assignment by an insolvent debtor with preferences, if there be a conflict as to the words used, or if the words themselves be ambiguous, the question of intent must be left to the jury.</p> <p>There is no class of cases which are more peculiarly within the province of the jury than such as involve the existence of fraud.</p> <p>Under the peculiar circumstances of this case, it was not error to submit to tiie jury the question of fraud referred to in the opinion of the court.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “[T]he mere fact that the witness is interested in the result of the suit is deemed sufficient to require the credibility of his testimony to be submitted to the jury as a question of fact”
  • \[T]he mere fact that the witness is interested in the result of the suit is deemed sufficient to require the credibility of his testimony to be submitted to the jury as a question of fact\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brown, After Stating the Case

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.