Legal Opinion

Washington Imp. Co. v. Kansas Pac. Ry. Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kansas

Decided July 1, 1879PublishedCited by 3 opinions

On motion to remand cause to the state court. This was a proceeding by mandamus brought in the state court pursuant to the state statutes (Gen. St. Kan. c. 80, p. 706). The object was to compel the defendant company to register the transfer of certain certificates of shares therein of which the plaintiff corporation alleges itself to be the owner; and the plaintiff also prays damages for the wrongful refusal of the defendant to make or allow such registration.

Read the full summary

On motion to remand cause to the state court. This was a proceeding by mandamus brought in the state court pursuant to the state statutes (Gen. St. Kan. c. 80, p. 706). The object was to compel the defendant company to register the transfer of certain certificates of shares therein of which the plaintiff corporation alleges itself to be the owner; and the plaintiff also prays damages for the wrongful refusal of the defendant to make or allow such registration. The plaintiff is a corporation created by the state of Pennsylvania; the defendant by the state of Kansas. The defendant filed in the…

1Opinion of the CourtMiller, Circuit Justice

(orally). This motion must he denied. This is a “suit of a civil nature at law” within the meaning of the ant of congress of March 3d, 1875. The statutes of Kansas so treat it, hoth in the procedure and the judgment to be rendered. Gen. St. 1868, p. 766. It was substantially so held by this court in a case whose judgment was affirmed last winter by the supreme court, in which it was decided that the judgment in mandamus had the conelusiveness of judgments in other eases as to matters directly involved and determined. Block v. Commissioners, 99 U. S. 686. This litigation relates to property…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Boom Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. Block v. CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1879

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Indiana ex rel. City of Muncie v. Lake Erie & W. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1898
  2. People ex rel. Van Dyke v. Colorado Cent. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado · 1890
  3. Erwin v. WalshU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1886

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API