Legal Opinion
Uden v. Great Northern Const. Co.
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided September 27, 1924No. 417PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CUSHMAN, District Judge.
The motion is to remand to the state court. The suit is one for the foreclosure of labor and materialmen’s liens. The removal was on the motion of a defendant to a eross-eomplaint. The Humphrey Investment Corporation, the owner of the property affected by the liens, is a party defendant to the main suit. The requisite diversity of citizenship for removal does not exist in the main suit. The Humphrey Investment Corporation, a citizen of Washington, by eross-eomplaint sued the contractor, its codefendant in the main suit, also a citizen of Washington, and the National…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Salem Trust Co. v. Manufacturers' Finance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Niles-Bement-Pond Co. v. Iron Moulders Union Local No. 68Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Hill v. HardingSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Columbia Digger Co. v. RectorDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Leadman v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1950
- City of Waco, Tex. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1935
- Board of Levee Com'rs of Orleans Levee Dist. v. HulseDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1927
- Nelson v. Camp Mfg. Co.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1942
- In re AntonDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1935