Higson v. North River Insurance
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from Peebles, J., at May Term, 1910, of Pitt. Civil action pending in the Superior Court of Pitt County and heard upon motion for judgment by default and inquiry. No answer has been filed, but on the 23d of April, 1910, defendant filed a petition and bond for removal to the Circuit Court of the United States, which at the hearing before Judge Peebles was urged in bar of the judgment by default.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from Peebles, J., at May Term, 1910, of Pitt. Civil action pending in the Superior Court of Pitt County and heard upon motion for judgment by default and inquiry. No answer has been filed, but on the 23d of April, 1910, defendant filed a petition and bond for removal to the Circuit Court of the United States, which at the hearing before Judge Peebles was urged in bar of the judgment by default. Upon the hearing his Honor rendered the following judgment: This cause coming on to be heard before Honorable R. B. Peebles, Judge presiding at the May Term of Pitt County Superior…
1Opinion of the Court
Brown, J.,
after stating the case. It appears to be settled by both the Federal and State courts in numerous decisions based upon petitions to remove causes pending in State courts upon the ground of diverse citizenship, that the jurisdiction of a State court over a removable case terminates upon the timely filing therein of a proper petition and bond for its removal to a circuit of the United States. Natl. S. S. Co. v. Tugman, 106 U. S., 118; Stone v. State of South Carolina, 117 U. S., 430; Winslow v. Collins, 110 N. C., 121.
It is equally well settled that the State court is not bound to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Stone v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Steamship Co. v. TugmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railroad v. DaughtrySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Howard v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. HodgeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Pruitt v. Charlotte Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Corporation Commission v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- Morganton v. . HuttonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- New England Oil & Pipe Line Co. v. BroylesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.