The opinion of the court was delivered by: LUHRING
The defendant, Louis O. Bergh, is a non-resident of the District of Columbia. No process has been issued against him. The other defendants have appeared and answered.
On October 10th, 1938, Mr. Bergh, appearing specially, filed the following motion:
"1. To dismiss the action on the ground that there is a lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant Bergh, in that
"A. The said defendant Bergh, as he is a resident of the State of New Jersey and is not within the District of Columbia, is not subject to service of process.
"B. There is no property or res within the District of Columbia to give the Court in rem jurisdiction.
"II. To dismiss the action on the ground that
"A. There is lack of jurisdiction over the persons of the claimants listed in paragraph "5" of the bill of complaint, and that
"B. Such claimants are indispensable parties, and that
"C. Assuming there were jurisdiction, such claimants could not be brought in by amendment of the bill because the claimants could not be jointed in one action.
"III. To dismiss the action on the ground that there is a lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, in that
"A. The claims of the plaintiff against the said claimants are null and void under section 3477 of the Revised Statutes, and
"B. The bill of complaint fails to show that the Court has any equitable jurisdiction ...