Legal Opinion

Flash v. Dillon

United States Circuit Court

Decided October 2, 1884PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Motion to Remand. cited 16 Wall. 190; 19 Feu. Rep. 49; 4 Dill. 557; 99 ü. S. 80; 10 Fed. Rep. 406.

1Opinion of the CourtSabtn, J.

In tliis case it is urged that the same has been improperly removed to this court, the same not being a “suit” within the terms oí the act, and that it is virtually an appendage to the suit of Flash, Lewis & Co. v. R. Bruhn, No. 1,654, wherein judgment was rendered September 26, 1877, in the district court of Bowie county, Texas. In the state courts this class of proceedings is virtually recognized as a “suit,” and so generally understood and considered by the public and the profession; but the question seems to be whether, in point of fact, it is such a “suit” as can be removed to this…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bank v. Turnbull & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1873

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Braithwaite v. JordanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Misani v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1964
  3. Rose v. MinisNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
  4. Finn v. Rotating Valve Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1938
  5. Hutchinson v. GoceliakNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962

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

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

Powered by the Exa API