Legal Opinion
Smith v. Waldemar
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided June 16, 1949No. Civ. No. 541PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DARR, District Judge.
Plaintiff and one of the defendants have moved separately to remand this cause to the state court from which it was removed by the other two defendants, and the two removing defendants have moved that the third defendant be made a party defendant here. All of the defendants are nonresidents of Tennessee.
• [1] . In the Court’s opinion the cause was improperly, removed.and must be remanded. A declaration has not been filed, but the summons shows that the three defendants are being sued jointly and severally “in an action for damages for personal injuries and hospital and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co. v. BohonSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Swain v. Tennessee Copper Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1903
- Wright v. Missouri Pac. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Doran v. Elgin Cooperative Credit Ass'nDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1950
- Billups v. American Surety Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 1950
- Derry v. Roadway Express, Inc.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1965
- Santa Margarita Mutual Water Co. v. State Water Rights Board of CaliforniaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1958
- Karri v. BMW (US) Holding Corp.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2023
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.