Legal Opinion

Hough v. Société Electrique Westinghouse de Russie

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 6, 1916PublishedCited by 3 opinions

At Law. Action by David L. Hough against the Société Electrique Westinghouse de Russie and another, originally brought in the Supreme Court of the state of New York. On plaintiff’s motion to remand, after removal of the cause to the United States District Court, and defendants’ motion to dismiss the action.

Read the full summary

At Law. Action by David L. Hough against the Société Electrique Westinghouse de Russie and another, originally brought in the Supreme Court of the state of New York. On plaintiff’s motion to remand, after removal of the cause to the United States District Court, and defendants’ motion to dismiss the action. This is an action originally brought in the Supreme Court of the state of New "Fork against a French corporation doing business in Russia and Robert H. McCarter, who was appointed its liquidator by resolution of the shareholders at a general meeting held in the city of Paris on the 30th…

1Opinion of the CourtLearned Hand, District Judge

(after stating the fae'ts as above). [1,2] The first question to be considered is the motion to remand, for if that should be granted this court has no jurisdiction to pass on the question of the validity of the service against McCarter. McCarter’s testimony shows that he is a citizen of the United States, and alleges that he resides in London, England; that he came to New York shortly after the outbreak of the Great War, and is now temporarily sojourning in New York on that account. He does not rest his right of removál upon the fact that he is a citizen of any of the states, for the record…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Butchers' Benevolent Ass'n v. Crescent City Live-Stock Landing & Slaughter-House Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1873
  2. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  3. Wecker v. National Enameling & Stamping Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  4. Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills v. MenefeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  5. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. SchwyhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1913

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lucania Societa Italiana Di Navigazione v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1923
  2. Uden v. Great Northern Const. Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1924
  3. Good v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.District Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API