Case Name: BOWKER v. HAIGHT & FREESE CO. et al.
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1905-09-04
Citations: 140 F. 794
Docket Number: 
Parties: BOWKER v. HAIGHT & FREESE CO. et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 140
Pages: 794–795

Head Matter:
BOWKER v. HAIGHT & FREESE CO. et al.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
September 4, 1905.)
Equity — Intervention—Suit by One in Behalf of All.
Where a suit in equity is brought on behalf of complainant and all others similarly situated, a person will not be given leave to intervene-by separate counsel to assert a claim in all respects similar to that of complainant, unless it is proposed to dispose of the cause otherwise-than in the usual way at final hearing, so that such intervention may be necessary to protect the petitioner’s rights.
In Equity. On petition of Vagri H. Simisen for leave to intervene.
Chas. E. Thumm, for petitioner.
Fred’k J. Moses, opposed.

Opinion:
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.
The claim set forth by the petitioner-is in all respects the same as that set forth in the complaint. The bill is brought by Bowker in behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, and the suit is prosecuted in Simisen's behalf, as much asín Bowker's. Under these circumstances, there seems no good' reason for allowing petitioner to intervene by another attorney. If he pleases, and will agree to bear his ratable proportion of the expenses of litigation, he may be made a co-complainant, appearing by attorney and counsel now representing Bowker. If not, his peti— tion is for the present denied. The receivers, however, will take note of' his name and address, and, in the event of any proposal to dispose of the cause otherwise than in the, usual way at final hearing on pleadings and proofs, he should be notified, and the court will then determine whether or not he should be allowed to come in by his own attorney, and continue the litigation.