City of Bellaire v. Baltimore Co
| Decision Date | 14 November 1892 |
| Docket Number | No. 38,38 |
| Citation | 13 S.Ct. 16,146 U.S. 117,36 L.Ed. 910 |
| Parties | CITY OF BELLAIRE v. BALTIMORE & O. R. CO. et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
J. A. Gallaher, for plaintiff in error.
John K. Cowen and Hugh L. Bond, Jr., for defendants in error.
The original petition was filed May 5, 1887, in the court of common pleas for the county of Belmont and state of Ohio, under sections 2233-2238 of the Revised Statutes of the state, by the city of Bellaire, a municipal corporation of that state, against the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, a corporation of Maryland, and the Central Ohio Railroad Company, a corporation of Ohio, to condemn and appropriate, for the purpose of opening and extending a street across the railroad tracks of the defendants, a strip of land about 60 feet wide and 160 feet long, of which, the petition alleged, 'said defendants claim to be the owners, legal and equitable,' 'but as to the proportionate interest of each of said defendants this plaintiff is not advised.' Notice of the petition was issued to and served upon both defendants within the state of Ohio.
After the return day, and before trial, the case was removed into the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of Ohio by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, which alleged that this defendant was in possession of the land in question under a lease from its codefendant, and that there was a controversy wholly between the plaintiff and this defendant, and which could be fully determined as between them; and further alleged, on the affidavit of its agent, that from prejudice and local influence it would not be able to obtain justice in the courts of the state. The city of Bellaire moved to remand the case to the state court.
On July 5, 1887, the circuit court of the United States, as appears by its decision and order entered of record, overruled the motion to remand, upon this ground:
The case was afterwards tried by a jury, and a verdict returned upon which judgment was rendered for the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company. The city of Bellaire sued out this writ of error, assigning errors in the denial of the motion to remand, and in sundry rulings and instructions at the trial.
Under the act of congress in force at the time of the removal of this case and of the refusal to remand it, prejudice and local influence which would prevent the party removing it from...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hough v. Southern Ry. Co.
... ... 1055; Wilson v. Oswego ... Township, 151 U.S. 56, 14 S.Ct. 259, 38 L.Ed. 70; ... Bellaire v. Railway Co., 146 U.S. 117, 13 S.Ct. 16, ... 36 L.Ed. 910; Life Ass'n v. Farmer, 77 F. 929, ... ...
-
Tolbert v. Jackson, 8877.
...138 U.S. 298, 11 S.Ct. 306, 34 L.Ed. 963; Torrence v. Shedd, 144 U.S. 527, 12 S.Ct. 726, 36 L.Ed. 528; Bellaire v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., 146 U.S. 117, 13 S.Ct. 16, 36 L. Ed. 910; Wilson v. Oswego Township, 151 U.S. 56, 14 S.Ct. 259, 38 L.Ed. 70; Whitcomb v. Smithson, 175 U.S. 635, ......
-
Regis v. United Drug Co.
... ... 1055; Ches. & O. Ry. v ... Dixon, 179 U.S. 131, 21 Sup.Ct. 67, 45 L.Ed. 121; ... Kansas City Sub. Ry. v. Herman, 187 U.S. 63, 23 ... Sup.Ct. 24, 47 L.Ed. 76; Alabama Great South. Ry. v ... Corbin v. Van Brunt, 105 U.S. 576, 26 L.Ed. 1176 ... (action of ejectment); Bellaire v. B. & O.R.R., 146 ... U.S. 117, 13 Sup.Ct. 16, 36 L.Ed. 910 (condemnation ... proceedings); ... ...
-
Town of Morganton v. Hutton & Bourbonnais Co.
... ... at page 317 (62 S.E. 1096), and ... cases cited therein ... In ... Bellaire v. Railroad, 146 U.S. 117, 13 S.Ct. 16, 36 ... L.Ed. 910, it is said: ... controversy between the railroad and the city was separable ... from that between other property owners and the city and ... removable alone ... ...