Wind River Lumber Co. v. Frankfort Marine, Accident & Plate Glass Ins.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. Action at law by the Wind River Lumber Company against the Frankfort Marine, Accident & Plate Glass Insurance Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. The plaintiff in error was operating a lumber mill at Cascade Locks, Or. On September 1, 1903, it employed one Westman to work in its sawmill as an oiler of the mill machinery.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. Action at law by the Wind River Lumber Company against the Frankfort Marine, Accident & Plate Glass Insurance Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. The plaintiff in error was operating a lumber mill at Cascade Locks, Or. On September 1, 1903, it employed one Westman to work in its sawmill as an oiler of the mill machinery. Westman became 16 years of age on March 22, 1904. On September 24, 1903, he was injured while performing his duties as oiler about the mill. Ho brought an action to recover…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1] It is contended! that the court erred in refusing to remand the case to the state court. By the first section of Act March '3, 1887, c. 373, 24 Stat. 552, as corrected b}»' Act Aug. 13, 1888, c. 866, § 1, 25 Stat.
*343433 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 509), any civil action of which the Circuit Court is given jurisdiction by the first section of the act may be removed to the Circuit Court of the United States by the defendant or defendants being nonresidents of the state, and by the first section of that act Circuit Courts of the United States are given…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Barrow Steamship Co. v. KaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Blair v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- In Re HohorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Pelton v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Caldwell v. BarrettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Niccum v. Northern Assur. Co.District Court, D. Indiana · 1927
- Sandusky Foundry & Machine Co. v. De LavaudDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1918
- Chas. Pfizer & Co. v. Laboratori Pro-Ter Prodotti Therapeutici S. P. A.District Court, S.D. New York · 1967
- Bradshaw v. BowdenDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1914
- Keating v. Pennsylvania Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1917
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.