Ex parte Roe. riginal, No. 13

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtVan Devanter
Citation34 S.Ct. 722,234 U.S. 70,58 L.Ed. 1217
PartiesEX PARTE ROE. riginal
Docket NumberNo. 13,O
Decision Date25 May 1914

234 U.S. 70
34 S.Ct. 722
58 L.Ed. 1217
EX PARTE ROE.
No. 13, Original.
Argued April 6, 1914.
Decided May 25, 1914.

Page 71

Mr. S. P. Jones for petitioner.

Messrs. Joseph W. Bailey and F. H. Prendergast for respondent.

Mr. Justice Van Devanter delivered the opinion of the court:

By an action begun in a state court in Harrison county, Texas, W. L. Roe sought to recover from the Texas & Pacific Railway Company, a Federal corporation, $30,000 as damages for personal injuries sustained through its negligence while he was in its employ as a brakeman, and while both were engaged in interstate commerce. In due time and in the accustomed way, the case was removed into the district court of the United States for that district upon the sole ground that it was one arising under a law of the United States, in that the defendant was chartered by an act of Congress. The plaintiff then moved that the case be remanded upon the ground that it also arose under the Federal employers' liability act (35 Stat. at L. 65, chap. 149, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1322; 36 Stat. at L. 291, chap. 143, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1324), and therefore was not removable. After a hearing, the motion was denied, for reasons assigned in the second branch of the opinion in Van Brimmer v. Texas & P. R. Co. 190 Fed. 394, 397. The plaintiff then petitioned this court for a wirt of mandamus commanding

Page 72

THE JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT COURT TO REMAnd the case. a rule to show cause was granted, and the respondent answered that the motion to remand had been denied because, upon consideration, he believed the case was lawfully removed.

As the case arose under a law of the United States, namely, the defendant's Federal charter (see Pacific R. Removal Cases, 115 U. S. 1, 29 L. ed. 319, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1113; Texas & P. R. Co. v. Cody, 166 U. S. 606, 41 L. ed. 1132, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 703, 1 Am. Neg. Rep. 763), and the requisite amount was in controversy, it is conceded that it was removable unless made otherwise by the fact that it also arose under the Federal employers' liability act. In the 6th section, as amended in 1910, that act declares: 'The jurisdiction of the courts of the United States under this act shall be concurrent with that of the courts of the several states, and no case arising under this act, and brought in any state court of competent jurisdiction, shall be removed to any court of the United States.' A like restriction upon removals appears in § 28 of the Judicial Code [36 Stat. at L. 1094, chap. 231, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. p. 140].

The question presented to the district court by the motion to remand was whether these provisions were intended to forbid a removal in every case falling within the employers' liability act, regardless of the presence of some independent...

To continue reading

Request your trial
55 practice notes
  • In re Briscoe, No. 04-4086.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • May 15, 2006
    ...Ex parte Hoard, 105 U.S. 578, 26 L.Ed. 1176 (1881); Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252 (1911); Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 1217 (1914); and Ex parte Park Square Auto. Station, 244 U.S. 412, 37 S.Ct. 732, 61 L.Ed. 1231 (1917)) (footnote omitted).......
  • Baines v. City of Danville, No. 9080-9084
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • August 10, 1964
    ...18 Stat. 472. 23 Ex parte Hoard, 105 U.S. 578, 26 L. Ed. 1176; Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252; Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 24 24 Stat. 552. 25 25 Stat. 433. 26 36 Stat. 1168. 27 2 U.S.Code Cong.Serv. 81st Cong., 1st Sess.1949, p. 1268. 28 Th......
  • Orange County Water Dist. v. Unocal Corp., No. 07-5724-op.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • October 1, 2009
    ...938, 87 L.Ed. 1185 (1943) (citing Ex parte Park Square Auto. Station, 244 U.S. 412, 37 S.Ct. 732, 61 L.Ed. 1231 (1917); Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 1217 (1914); Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252 (1911); Ex parte Hoard, 105 U.S. 578, 26 L.Ed. 11......
  • Mengel v. Justices of Superior Court
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
    • February 23, 1943
    ...v. Thompson, 232 Mass. 269, 122 N.E. 655; Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252, 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 392; Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 1217; Ex parte Wagner, 249 U.S. 465, 39 S.Ct. 317, 63 L.Ed. 709;Interstate Commerce Commission v. United States, 289 U......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
55 cases
  • In re Briscoe, No. 04-4086.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • May 15, 2006
    ...Ex parte Hoard, 105 U.S. 578, 26 L.Ed. 1176 (1881); Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252 (1911); Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 1217 (1914); and Ex parte Park Square Auto. Station, 244 U.S. 412, 37 S.Ct. 732, 61 L.Ed. 1231 (1917)) (footnote omitted).......
  • Baines v. City of Danville, No. 9080-9084
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • August 10, 1964
    ...18 Stat. 472. 23 Ex parte Hoard, 105 U.S. 578, 26 L. Ed. 1176; Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252; Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 24 24 Stat. 552. 25 25 Stat. 433. 26 36 Stat. 1168. 27 2 U.S.Code Cong.Serv. 81st Cong., 1st Sess.1949, p. 1268. 28 Th......
  • Orange County Water Dist. v. Unocal Corp., No. 07-5724-op.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • October 1, 2009
    ...938, 87 L.Ed. 1185 (1943) (citing Ex parte Park Square Auto. Station, 244 U.S. 412, 37 S.Ct. 732, 61 L.Ed. 1231 (1917); Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 1217 (1914); Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252 (1911); Ex parte Hoard, 105 U.S. 578, 26 L.Ed. 11......
  • Mengel v. Justices of Superior Court
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
    • February 23, 1943
    ...v. Thompson, 232 Mass. 269, 122 N.E. 655; Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252, 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 392; Ex parte Roe, 234 U.S. 70, 34 S.Ct. 722, 58 L.Ed. 1217; Ex parte Wagner, 249 U.S. 465, 39 S.Ct. 317, 63 L.Ed. 709;Interstate Commerce Commission v. United States, 289 U......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT