G. & C. Merriam Co. v. Saalfield & Ogilvie,
241 U.S. 22 (1916)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

G. & C. Merriam Co. v. Saalfield & Ogilvie, 241 U.S. 22 (1916)

G. & C. Merriam Co. v. Saalfield & Ogilvie

No. 178

Argued January 14, 17, 1916

Decided April 17, 1916

241 U.S. 22


Whether the district court has acquired jurisdiction over the person of defendant may be reviewed by this Court on direct appeal under § 238, Judicial Code.

An affidavit of one not a party to an action showing on its face that it was to be used only as evidence for defendants held in this case not to be construed as an appearance by the party making it.

Only a final judgment is res judicata as between the parties; nor is a decree res judicata as against a third party participating in the defense unless it is so far final as to be res judicata against the defendant himself.

Even though one not a party to the action might be estopped by final decree if and when made, he cannot be brought into the suit by ancillary proceedings before final decree as if he were already estopped.

One not a defendant, but who is estopped by the decree because of having exercised control of the defense and who is not a resident of the district, cannot be brought into the action by the filing of a supplemental bill and mere notice to, and substituted service on, him without service of original process within the district.

Such a supplemental bill is not dependent on or ancillary to the original suit in the sense that jurisdiction of it follows jurisdiction of the original cause.

The doctrine of res judicata furnishes a rule for the decision of a subsequent case between the same parties or their privies respecting the same cause of action, and only applies when the subsequent action has been brought.

The facts, which involve the jurisdiction of this Court on appeal from the district court under § 238, Judicial Code, and the jurisdiction of the district court to make

Page 241 U. S. 23

and enforce a decree based on substituted service of process, are stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.