Case Name: Martindale v. Waas and others
Court: United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1882-03
Citations: 11 F. 551
Docket Number: 
Parties: Martindale v. Waas and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 11
Pages: 551–551

Head Matter:
Martindale v. Waas and others.
(Circuit Court, D. Minnesota.
March, 1882.)
1 Practice — Rehearing.
Where the court has passed upon all the issues necessary to determine the rights of the parties a motion for rehearing will be denied.
2. Same — Rules oe Practice.
A state law requiring a judge to give his decision in writing upon every issue made hy the pleadings is not binding on the federal courts.
3. Same — Rules oe Practice in Federal Courts.
The equity practice and procedure of the federal courts is regulated hy the rules promulgated by the supreme court of the United States.
Motion for Rehearing.
A. F. Foster, for motion.
A. F. Scott, against.

Opinion:
Nelson, D. J.
The motion is denied. The court passed upon all the issues necessary to determine the rights of the parties, and gave a decree in favor of the plaintiff. The law of the state of Minnesota requiring a judge to give his decision in writing upon every issue made by the pleadings is not binding upon the federal courts. The equity practice, as restricted by the rules promulgated by the supreme court of the United States, regulates the mode of proceedings, and no law of congress imposes upon the judge any such duty as indicated.
When the main issue which controls the result is determined, all others presented by the pleadings are, by implication, decided in harmony therewith.
See note on page 580.