Pope v. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH ' CIRCUIT. Ball and Pettit filed their bill in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois alleging that Ball was a citizen of Indiana and that Pettit was a citizen of Wisconsin, ánd that defendants were citizens of Indiana and Illinois, which suit war. discontinued as to Ball, leaving Pettit, a citizen of Wisconsin, the sole complainant.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH ' CIRCUIT. Ball and Pettit filed their bill in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois alleging that Ball was a citizen of Indiana and that Pettit was a citizen of Wisconsin, ánd that defendants were citizens of Indiana and Illinois, which suit war. discontinued as to Ball, leaving Pettit, a citizen of Wisconsin, the sole complainant. Pope was appointed, in substitution for one Fish, receiver of the Chicago and South Atlantic Eailroad Company of Illinois, the order containing, among other things, the…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Fullee
If the decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals was made final by the act of March' 3, 1891, c. 517, 26 Stat. 826, this appeal must be dismissed; and it was so made final if the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court depended entirely on diverse citizenship.
The Circuit Courts of the United States have original jurisdiction of suits of a civil nature, at law or in equity, by reason of the citizenship of the parties, in cases between citizens of different States, or between citizens of a State and aliens; and, by reason of the cause of action, “in cases arising under the Constitution or laws of the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. CoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Kennedy v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Krippendorf v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Pacific Railroad of Missouri v. Missouri Pacific Ry. Co. And Others. 1Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Minnesota Co. v. St. Paul Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1865
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- Shulthis v. McDougalSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Scholes v. LehmannCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
- Alexander v. HillmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Donell v. KowellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- ROBB EVANS & ASSOCIATES, LLC v. HolibaughCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2010
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.