US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

GENEVA FURNITURE MFG. CO. V. S. KARPEN & BROS., 238 U. S. 254 (1915)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 238 U. S. 254 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Geneva Furniture Mfg. Co. v. S. Karpen & Bros., 238 U.S. 254 (1915)

Geneva Furniture Manufacturing Company v. S. Karpen & Bros.

No. 496

Submitted December 17, 1914

Decided June 14, 1915

238 U.S. 254


Where the plaintiff really makes a substantial claim under an Act of Congress, the district court has jurisdiction whether the claim ultimately be held good or bad. The Fair v. Kohler Die Co., 228 U. S. 22.

Jurisdiction is the power to consider and decide one way or the other as the law may require; it is not to be declined because it is not foreseen with certainty that the party invoking it may succeed.

Where a bill includes several causes of action, some arising under the patent laws and others on breach of contractual relations, and one of the defendants is a corporation that cannot be sued in the district without its consent, save in cases arising under the patent laws, the rule in equity respecting joinder of causes of action yields to the jurisdictional statute and, if the designated defendant objects to the jurisdiction, the bill must be dismissed, so far as that defendant is concerned, as to the causes of action not arising under the patent laws.

Whether in such a case all the causes of action may be maintained in a single bill as against the other defendants is a question of general equity jurisdiction and practice, and is not open to consideration on direct appeal to this Court under § 238, Judicial Code. Bogart v. Southern Pacific Co., 228 U. S. 137. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 238 U. S. 255

The facts, which involve the jurisdiction of the district court in cases arising under the patent laws of the United States, are stated in the opinion. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 238 U. S. 257

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™