Legal Opinion

Brunski v. Ford Motor Co.

District Court, W.D. Missouri

Decided March 31, 1923No. 5462PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtReeves, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). 1. As a postulate to a consideration of the questions involved here, it should be stated that, where plaintiff’s petition states a joint cause of action, it is not removable, even though defendants may file separate answers and set up different defenses. A separate defense may defeat a joint recovery, but it cannot deprive the plaintiff of his right to prosecute his suit to final decision in his own way. Whiteaker v. Railroad, 252 Mo. 438, 160 S. W. 1009; Chi. Rock Island Ry. v. Whiteaker, 239 U. S. 421, 36 Sup. Ct. 152, 60 L. Ed. 360; Southern Railway Co.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Wilson v. Republic Iron & Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  3. Powers v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  5. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. SchwyhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1913

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Evans v. RohrbachNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1955
  2. State Ex Rel. Hancock v. FalkenhainerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1927
  3. Olds v. Brown Shoe Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1938
  4. Whiteley v. Eagle-Picher Lead Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API