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

REED V. ALLEN, 286 U. S. 191 (1932)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 286 U. S. 191 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Reed v. Allen, 286 U.S. 191 (1932)

Reed v. Allen

No. 600

Argued April 18, 1932

Decided May 16, 1932

286 U.S. 191


1. The title to real estate and the right to rents collected from it depended alike upon one and the same construction of a will. In an interpleader over the rents, A got the decree. B appealed, without supersedeas, and secured a reversal, but, before his appeal was decided, A had sued him in ejectment, invoking the decree, and recovered a judgment for the real estate. B did not appeal from this judgment, but, after the reversal of the decree, he sued A in ejectment for the land, relying upon the reversal.


(1) That the judgment in the first action of ejectment was a bar to the second. P. 286 U. S. 197.

(2) B's remedy was to appeal the first ejectment as well as the interpleader, and advise the appellate court of their relation. Butler v. Eaton, 141 U. S. 240. P. 286 U. S. 198.

2. A suit by interpleader to determine the right to funds collected as rents from a piece of land, and an action in ejectment to determine title to the land itself, are on distinct causes of action concerning different subject matters, even though both depend upon the same facts and law, and a decree of reversal in the interpleader suit cannot be made to operate as a reversal of a judgment for the other party, in the ejectment case; the rule of restitution upon reversal is irrelevant. P. 286 U. S. 197.

3. Jurisdiction to review one judgment gives an appellate court no power to reverse or modify another and independent judgment. P. 286 U. S. 198. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 286 U. S. 192

4. Where a judgment in one case has successfully been made the basis for a judgment in a second case, the second judgment will stand as res judicata although the first judgment be subsequently reversed. P. 286 U. S. 199.

5. A judgment, not set aide on appeal or otherwise, is equally effective as an estoppel upon the points decided whether the decision be right or wrong. P. 286 U. S. 201

57 App.D.C. 78, 54 F.2d 713, reversed.

Certiorari, 284 U.S. 615, to review the reversal of a judgment of ejectment. See also 17 F.2d 666. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 286 U. S. 196

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 |™