Legal Opinion
Gerstman v. Poole
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided February 20, 1950No. Civ. A. No. 10045PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McGRANERY, District Judge.
This suit was brought to recover damages for personal injuries. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked on the basis of diversity of citizenship, and the defendant moves to dismiss on the ground of improper venue.
However, an examination of the complaint discloses that the “residence” of the parties rather than their “citizenship” is pleaded. An allegation that a party is a resident of a state is not a sufficient allegation of his citizenship, and is insufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the District Court. Neel v. Pennsylvania Co., 157 U.S. 153, 15 S.Ct. 589, 39…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Grace v. American Central InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Realty Holding Co. v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Kelleam v. Maryland Casualty Co. of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1940
- Jeffcott v. DonovanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1943
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pentz v. DowneyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1953
- Pentz v. PennsylvaniaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1953
- Douglas v. United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1955