Hepburn Dundas v. Ellzey

Decision Date01 February 1805
Citation6 U.S. 445,2 Cranch 445,2 L.Ed. 332
PartiesHEPBURN and DUNDAS v. ELLZEY
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

THIS case came before the court, on a certificate of division of opinion by the judges of the circuit court of the district of Virginia.

The certificate stated, 'in this cause it occurred as a question whether Hepburn and Dundas, the plaintiffs in this cause, who are citizens and residents of the district of Columbia, and are so stated in the pleadings, can maintain an action in this court against the defendant who is a citizen and inhabitant of the commonwealth of Virginia, and is also stated so to be in the pleadings, or whether for want of jurisdiction the said suit ought not to be dismissed.'

[Argument of Counsel from pages 446-451 intentionally omitted] Mr.Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the court.

The question in this case is whether the plaintiffs, as residents of the district of Columbia, can maintain an action in the circuit court of the United States for the district of Virginia.

This depends on the act of congress describing the jurisdiction of that court.That act gives jurisdiction to the circuit courts in cases between a citizen of the state in which the suit is brought, and a citizen of another state.To support the jurisdiction in this case, therefore, it must appear that Columbia is a state.

On the part of the plaintiffs it has been urged that Columbia is a distinct political society; and is therefore 'a state' according to the definitions of writers on general law.

This is true.But as the act of congress obviously uses the word 'state' in reference to the term as used in the constitution, it becomes necessary to inquire whether Columbia is a state in the sense of that instrument.The result of that...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
67 cases
2 books & journal articles
  • WHAT IS A "STATE"? THE INCONSISTENT CONSTITUTIONAL TREATMENT OF UNITED STATES TERRITORIES.
    • United States
    • Albany Law Review Vol. 85 No. 4, December 2022
    • 22 d4 Dezembro d4 2022
    ...141 S. Ct. 2190, 2200 (2021). (41) U.S. CONST. art. III, [section] 2, cl. 1. (42) 28 U.S.C. [section] 1332. (43) Hepburn v. Ellzey, 6 U.S. 445 (44) Id. at 445, 452-53. (45) Id. at 452-53. (46) See, e.g., O'Donoghue v. United States, 289 U.S. 516, 543 (1933) (citizen of District of Columbia)......
  • DIVERSITY JURISDICTION AND THE COMMON-LAW SCOPE OF THE CIVIL ACTION.
    • United States
    • Washington University Law Review Vol. 99 No. 2, October 2021
    • 1 d5 Outubro d5 2021
    ...in the record" as a citizen of Kentucky and as a citizen of the Mississippi territory. See id. at 92. (75.) Hepburn & Dundas v. Elizey, 6 U.S. 445,452-53 (1805). Congress in 1940 enacted a statute that included citizens of the District of Columbia within the scope of diversity jurisdict......

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