City of New Orleans v. Quinlan
| Decision Date | 27 February 1899 |
| Docket Number | No. 343,343 |
| Citation | 19 S.Ct. 329,173 U.S. 191,43 L.Ed. 664 |
| Parties | CITY OF NEW ORLEANS v. QUINLAN |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
W. B. Sommerville and S. L. Gilmore, for plaintiff in error.
Charles Louque, for defendant in error.
This was an action brought if the circuit court of the United States for the Eastern district of Louisiana, by Mary Quinian, a citizen of the state of New York, against the city of New Orleans, to recover on a number of certificates owned by her, made by the city, and payable to bearer. Defendant excepted to the jurisdiction, because the petition contained no averment that the suit could have been maintained 'by the assignors of the claims or certificates sued upon.' The circuit court overruled the exception, and the cause subsequently went to judgment. 92 Fed. 695.
By the eleventh section of the judiciary act of 1789 it was expressly provided that the circuit courts could not take cognizance of a suit to recover the contents of any promissory note or other chose in action in favor of an assignee, unless a suit might have been prosecuted in such court to recover the said contents, if no assignment had been, except in cases of foreign bills of exchange. The act of March 3, 1875 (18 Stat. 470, c. 137), provided: 'Nor shall any circuit or district court have cognizance of any suit founded on contract in favor of an assignee, unless a suit might have been prosecuted in such court to recover thereon if no assignment had been made, except in cases of promissory notes negotiable by the law merchant and bills of exchange.' The restriction was thus removed as to 'promissory notes negotiable by the law merchant,' and jurisdiction in such suits made to depend on the citizenship of the parties, as in other cases. Tredway v. Sanger, 107 U. S. 323, 2 Sup. Ct. 691.
By the first section of the act of March 3, 1887 (24 Stat. 552, c. 373), as corrected by the act of August 13, 1888 (25 Stat. 433, c. 866), the provision was made to read as follows: 'Nor shall any circuit or district court have cognizance of any suit, except upon foreign bills of exchange, to recover the contents of any promissory note or other chose in action in favor of any assignee, or of any subsequent holder if such instrument be payable to bearer and be not made by any corporation, unless such suit might have been prosecuted in such court to recover the said contents if no assignment or transfer had been made.'
These certificates were payable to bearer, and made by a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott County, Ark. v. Advance-Rumley Thresher Co.
... ... assignor could have done so. Independent School Dist. of ... Sioux City, Iowa, v. Rew, 111 F. 1, 49 C.C.A. 198, 55 ... L.R.A. 364; Lyon County, Iowa, v. Keene Five-Cent ... Citizens' Savings Bank v. City of Newburyport, ... 169 F. 766, 95 C.C.A. 232; New Orleans v. Quinlan, ... 173 U.S. 191, 19 Sup.Ct. 329, 43 L.Ed. 664. The warrants sued ... on here were ... ...
-
Tillman v. Russo Asiatic Bank
...of Stanley, v. Bank of North America, 4 Dall. 8, 1 L. Ed. 718; Sheldon v. Sill, 8 How. 441, 12 L. Ed. 1147; New Orleans v. Quinlan, 173 U. S. 191, 19 S. Ct. 329, 43 L. Ed. 664. The draft in question was not a "foreign bill of exchange," for it was not drawn in one country upon a person in a......
-
City of Stuart v. Green
...1 S.Ct. 564, 568, 27 L.Ed. 298; City of New Orleans v. Benjamin, 153 U.S. 411, 14 S.Ct. 905, 38 L.Ed. 764; City of New Orleans v. Quinlan, 173 U.S. 191, 19 S.Ct. 329, 43 L.Ed. 664; Newgass v. City of New Orleans (C.C.) 33 F. 196; Rollins v. Chaffee County (C.C.) 34 F. 91; Wilson v. Knox Cou......
-
NEW ORLEANS COMMERCIAL CORP. v. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
...1900, 179 U.S. 472, 21 S.Ct. 174, 45 L.Ed. 280; Andes v. Ely, 1895, 158 U.S. 312, 15 S.Ct. 954, 39 L.Ed. 996; New Orleans v. Quinlan, 173 U.S. 191, 19 S.Ct. 329, 43 L.Ed. 664, affirming C.C., 1897, 92 F. However, the crucial point in the construction of the assignee clause in this case is w......