Gaugler v. Chicago, M. & P. S. Ry. Co.
District Court, D. Montana
, .At Law. Action by H. E. Gaugler and others against the Chicago, Milwaukee & Puget Sound Railway Company. On application for leave to renew a motion to remand to the state court.
1Opinion of the Court
BOURQUIN, District Judge.
[1] This is an application for leave to renew a motion to. remand heretofore denied by the predecessor of the judge now presiding herein. Upon presentation of said application the merits of the motion were argued. The court’s jurisdiction is always open to challenge, and while the judge who must try a cause, if tried, reluctantly reviews intermediate matters disposed of by his predecessor, if it appears there is no jurisdiction, it must be so determined, though in effect it sets aside the ruling of the former judge. This is a case wherein an insured and insurers (four…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Commercial Union InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Delaware County Commissioners v. Diebold Safe & Lock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Hall & Long v. Railroad Cos.Supreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Chicago, St. Louis & New Orleans Railroad v. Pullman Southern Car Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Thompson v. Railroad CompaniesSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Sellman v. HaddockNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Home InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1915
- Yorkshire Ins. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- Johanson v. Cudahy Packing Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1944
- Turk v. Illinois Cent. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.