Ex Parte in the Matter of Skinner & Eddy Corp., 265 U.S. 86 (1924)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 265 U.S. 78, click here.

Ex Parte in the Matter of Skinner & Eddy Corporation

No. 28, Original

Argued, on return to rule to show cause, April 14, 1924
Decided May 12, 1924
265 U.S. 86

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

TO THE COURT OF CLAIMS

1. The right of a plaintiff to dismiss a suit, if it exists, is absolute, independent of the reasons offered, and not affected by concealment or misstatement of reasons. P. 93.

2. The rule of the federal courts at law and in equity governing the right of a plaintiff to dismiss without prejudice should obtain in the Court of Claims. Pp. 92, 94.

3. A plaintiff in the Court of Claim may dismiss without prejudice when the government has filed no counterclaim, and will not be prejudiced, legally, by the dismissal. Id.

4. Where a plaintiff, after dismissing its suit in the Court of Clams, began a suit in a state court against the Shipping Board on the same causes of action, which remained pending, held that the subject matter was withdrawn from the cognizance of the Court of Claims by Jud.Code § 154, and that it could not resume its jurisdiction by setting aside the dismissal retroactively. P. 95.

5. An order of the Court of Claim attempting to reinstate a dismissed case in plain violation of the plaintiff’s right to dismiss it, and an effect of which would be to deprive the plaintiff of the right of trial by jury in a state court, may be corrected by mandamus. P. 96.

Writ absolute.

Rule on the Court of Claims directing it to show cause why it should not be required by mandamus or by prohibition to restore an order dismissing a suit, to set aside another vacating the first, and to abstain from attempting exercise of further jurisdiction in the case.