US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

MEXICAN CENTRAL RY. CO. V. PINKNEY, 149 U. S. 194 (1893)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 149 U. S. 194 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Mexican Central Ry. Co. v. Pinkney, 149 U.S. 194 (1893)

Mexican Central Railway Company v. Pinkney

No. 1199

Submitted April 17, 1893

Decided May 1, 1893

149 U.S. 194


To give a circuit court of the United States jurisdiction on the ground of diverse citizenship, the facts showing the requisite diverse citizenship must appear in such papers as properly constitute the record of the case.

The refusal by the trial court, during the progress of the trial, of leave to file a plea on the question of the plaintiff's citizenship and to permit issue chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 149 U. S. 195

to be joined thereon is within the discretion of that court, and is not reviewable here.

A person in charge of a joint railroad warehouse in a railroad center in Texas, the property of one of several companies which unite in bearing the expense of maintaining it and in selecting its employs and in controlling its expenses, who makes no contracts and handles no moneys on behalf of another railroad centering there, but not participating in the selection of the employees and in controlling expenses, and who is not on the payroll of the latter company, is not its "local agent" upon whom process may be served under the provisions of the statutes of that state (Sayles' Revised Civ.Stats. Art. 1223a).

The provisions of the Texas statutes which give to a special appearance, made to challenge the court's jurisdiction, the force and effect of a general appearance, so as to confer jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, are not binding upon federal courts sitting in that state, under the rule of procedure prescribed by the fifth section of the Act of June 1, 1872, as reproduced in Rev.Stat. § 914.

The case is stated in the opinion.

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™