Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/554

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

542 FEDERAL REPOSTEB. �These preliminaries having been satisfied, it is competent lor the court, if the plaintiff is by law entitled to a lien, to establish the same against the property, and to fix a time for the payment of the sum found to be due; and in default of payment at the time prescribed, a proper order of sale will be awarded, �It ia obvions that the plaintiff's claim may be legal or equitable. If it be an equitable demand, the court will hear and determine it without the intervention of a jury. If, on the contrary, it be the subject-matter of a common-law action, the court will direct that it be tried by jury; and if the claimant shall thus succeed in establishing his demand, be will be compelled to bring his Verdict or judgment into the equity suit to have it made a lien against the property. As a matter of course, either party would be entitled to a trial by jury of an action for personal injuries, or for any other common-law demand. This right is constitutional, and can- not be denied. �The resuit is that this motion must be sustained as to Eeceiver Morrill. He in no sense now represents the prop- erty upon whioh a lien is sought to be established. He bas no interest in defending the property, and no fund with which to make a defenoe good. No personal action, as we have seen, can be maintained against him. But we see no reason to rescind the order, so far as it affects the property in the hands of the new company. That company took the prop- erty under the final order of this court cum onere. The court reserved its jurisdiction to enforce liabilities incurred in the management of the property by its receivers, and to enforce them as liens upon the property. The case of the petitioner is a claim for personal injuries ; she bas a right, if her claim be well founded, to have it established as a lien upon the railway property. Such is the provision of section 1309 of the Code of lowa. �We can see no good reason to deny this petitioner the right to assert her claim in the only way that seems open to her. �The order made at the last term will be so far modified as ��� �