Anderson v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
At Raw. Action by W. M. Anderson against the Western Union Telegraph Company. On motion to remand. This action was instituted in a state court to recover damages in the sum of $5,000; the writ being returnable to the fall term of that court, which began on the 19th day of October, 1914. The statutes of the state of Arkansas require a defendant, when served with process 10 days before the commencement of the term, to plead on or before the third day of that term.
Read the full summary
At Raw. Action by W. M. Anderson against the Western Union Telegraph Company. On motion to remand. This action was instituted in a state court to recover damages in the sum of $5,000; the writ being returnable to the fall term of that court, which began on the 19th day of October, 1914. The statutes of the state of Arkansas require a defendant, when served with process 10 days before the commencement of the term, to plead on or before the third day of that term. On the 17th day of October, Í914, the defendant, a nonresident corporation (the plaintiff being a citizen of the state of Arkansas),…
1Opinion of the CourtTrieber, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). As this question has never been determined by any court in a published opinon, no notice of the intention to ask for a removal of a cause haying been required before the enactment of the Judicial Code, it is deemed proper, for the guidance of attorneys in this district, until the appellate courts have authoritatively settled it, to file an opinion.
[1] The law as uniformly declared is that the right of removal has to be determined from the facts as they appear from the pleadings at the time the petition and bond are filed (Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co. v.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Williamson v. OsentonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. WillardSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Dickerman v. Northern Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Blair v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Cheever v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Herbert v. Roxana Petroleum Corp.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 1926
- Johnson v. WalshDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1946
- Copeland v. Erie R.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1934
- Wentz v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County1943