Murphy v. Payette Alluvial Gold Co.
Decision Date | 12 December 1899 |
Docket Number | 2,594. |
Citation | 98 F. 321 |
Parties | MURPHY v. PAYETTE ALLUVIAL GOLD CO., Limited. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Oregon |
Zera Snow, for plaintiff.
W. A Cleland, for defendant.
Motion is made to remand this cause to the circuit court of the state of Oregon for Malheur county, whence it was removed to this court. The plaintiff sued upon several causes of action one of which arose in his favor, and four of which were assigned to him by others. The amount involved in the first cause is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction, but the sum of all the demands exceeds $2,000. The petition for removal alleged that the plaintiff was then, as well as at the commencement of the action, a citizen of the state of Oregon and that the defendant was at said dates an alien corporation created under the laws of Great Britain and Ireland. The complaint had set forth the facts concerning the four assigned causes of action, and the names of the respective assignors, but neither in the complaint nor in the petition was there any averment concerning the citizenship of such assignors. After the motion to remand came on for hearing, an application was made on behalf of the defendant for leave to file in this court an amended petition showing that the citizenship of the assignors of the assigned claims was such that the case was one for removal. There can be no doubt that upon the record, together with the petition which was filed in the state court, no cause for removal was presented, and that the jurisdiction of the state court could not be thereby devested. It was necessary to show affirmatively that the citizenship of the assignors of the assigned claims were diverse from that of the defendant, or that they were not aliens. In Parker v. Ormsby, 141 U.S. 81, 85, 11 Sup.Ct. 913, 35 L.Ed. 656, the court said:
But it is contended that inasmuch as, in fact, the citizenship of the assignors was such that the case was properly removable, their citizenship can now be shown by an amended petition filed in this court. This contention leads to the inquiry, what is the power of this court to permit amendments to the petition for removal after the cause has been docketed herein? In Crehore v. Railway Co., 131 U.S. 240, 9 Sup.Ct. 692, 33 L.Ed. 144, the right of the circuit court to amend the petition was denied in a cause which had been removed on the ground of diverse citizenship, on a petition which alleged the citizenship of the parties at the time when it was filed, only, and not at the time of the commencement of the action. The court said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Metropolitan Casualty Ins Co v. Stevens
...etc. Co. v. Montgomery, D.C., 218 F. 471; Donovan v. Wells, Fargo & Co., 8 Cir., 169 F. 363, 22 L.R.A.,N.S., 1250; Murphy v. Payette Alluvial Gold Co., C.C., 98 F. 321; Johnson v. Wells, Fargo Co., C.C., 91 F. 1; Shepherd v. Bradstreet Co., C.C., 65 F. 142. ...
-
DRAINAGE DIST. NO. 17 v. Guardian Trust Co.
...S. Ct. 692, 33 L. Ed. 144; Ralya Market Co. v. Armour & Co. (C. C.) 102 F. 530; Fife v. Whittell (C. C.) 102 F. 537; Murphy v. Payette Alluvial Gold Co. (C. C.) 98 F. 321. It is therefore necessary to examine the proceedings which it is claimed resulted in a removal of the state court suit ......
-
Shane v. Butte Electric Ry. Co.
... ... court was advised ... Murphy ... v. Payette Alluvial Gold Company (C.C.) 98 F. 321, was a ... case ... ...
-
Cline v. Belt
...the footnote the following cases: Crehore v. Ohio & M. R. Co., 1889, 131 U.S. 240, 9 S.Ct. 692, 33 L.Ed. 144. See Murphy v. Payette Alluvial Gold Co., C.C.Or.1899, 98 F. 321, holding that a removal petition could not be amended to show the requisite diversity of citizenship. Cameron v. Hodg......