Legal Opinion
Minnesota v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided May 20, 1931PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SANBORN, District Judge.
The Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company and the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company— which companies, for convenience, will be hereinafter referred to as the railroads — removed this proceeding to this court. Their petition, asserts that they are both citizens and residents of states other than Minnesota; that the state of Minnesota is a nominal party, designated as the complainant in the title because of the provisions of section 4651, Mason’s Minnesota Statutes 1927; that the suit in the state court wás commenced by the city of…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Boom Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Weston and Others v. the City Council of CharlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
- Meyer v. Construction CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- United States v. BeebeSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Range Oil Supply Company, a Minnesota Corporation v. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1957
- Vann v. JacksonDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1958
- City of New York v. Evigo Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1954
- Andrusick v. City of Apple ValleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- City of Owatonna v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1969
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.