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

NEEL V. PENNSYLVANIA CO., 157 U. S. 153 (1895)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 157 U. S. 153 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Neel v. Pennsylvania Co., 157 U.S. 153 (1895)

Neel v. Pennsylvania Company

No. 188

Submitted January 28, 1895

Decided March 11, 1895

157 U.S. 153


When a defendant in a state court removes the cause to a circuit court of the United States on the ground of diverse citizenship, and the circuit court gives judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff below brings the case here, and it appears on examining the record that the pleadings do not disclose of what state the plaintiff was a citizen, this Court will of its own motion reverse the judgment, remand the cause to the Circuit Court with costs against the defendant in error, and further adjudge that defendant must also pay costs in this Court.

This action was brought in the Court of Common Pleas of Richland County, Ohio, and removed into the circuit court by the defendant. The petition for removal stated:

"First. The plaintiff was at the time of the commencement of this action, and still is, a resident of the State of Ohio, in the County of Richland. Second. The Pennsylvania Company, the defendant

Page 157 U. S. 154

herein, is a corporation duly incorporated under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, and was at the commencement of this action, and still is, a citizen of that state, and was not then, nor has it ever been, a citizen of the State of Ohio. Third. The matters in controversy in this suit are wholly between citizens of different states, and the amount in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum of two thousand dollars, and is to recover the sum of ten thousand ($10,000) dollars."

The record failed to show of what state plaintiff was a citizen.

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 |™