Dormitzer v. Illinois & St. Louis Bridge Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
In Equity. Demurrer.
1Opinion of the CourtLowell, C. J.
Of the points so ably and thoroughly argued I shall concern myself with but one. It is generally understood to be settled by The Removal Cases, 100 U. S. 457, and Pacific R. Co. v. Ketchum, 101 U. S. 289, that under the statute of 1875, as well as under former acts, circuit courts of the United States have no jurisdiction of a civil action between ordinary parties, whether originally or by removal, if any of the necessary parties to the controversy on opposite sides are citizens of the same state. It may be said that this *218point is not necessary to the decision of those cases; but the whole…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Meyer v. Construction CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Toland v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Pacific Railroad v. KetchumSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Wood v. DummerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1824
- Hatch v. DanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Vidal v. South American Securities Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Louisville & N. R.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1912
- Bucyrus Co. v. McArthurDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1914
- American Surety Co. v. Edwards & Bradford Lumber Co.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1944
- Condit v. Jackson Corset Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1929
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.