Rouse v. Letcher
| Decision Date | 21 January 1895 |
| Docket Number | No. 582,582 |
| Citation | 156 U.S. 47,39 L.Ed. 341,15 S.Ct. 266 |
| Parties | ROUSE v. LETCHER |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
James P. Wood, for the motion.
James Hagerman and Geo. P. B. Jackson, opposed.
Mr. Chief Justice FULLER, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the court.
By section 6 of the judiciary act of March 3, 1891, the judgments or decrees of the circuit courts of appeals are made final 'in all cases in which the jurisdiction is dependent entirely upon the opposite parties to the suit or controversy being aliens and citizens of the United States or citizens of different states.' And it is also provided that 'in all cases not hereinbefore, in this section, made final there shall be of right an appeal or writ of error or review of the case by the supreme court of the United States where the matter in controversy shall exceed one thousand dollars.' 26 Stat. 826, 828, c. 517.
If the decree of the circuit court of appeals for the Eighth circuit was final under the sixth section, then this appeal must be dismissed; and in order to maintain that the decision was not final it must appear that the jurisdiction of the circuit court was not dependent entirely upon the opposite parties being citizens of different states. The jurisdiction of the circuit court was invoked by the filing of the bill, upon which it appeared that the suit was one of which cognizance could properly be taken on the ground of diverse citizenship; and it did not appear therefrom that jurisdiction was rested or could be asserted on any other ground. But it is insisted that appellee's cause of action arose long after the circuit court had taken jurisdiction and the receivers had been appointed, and that her suit by intervention was one arising under the constitution and laws of the United States, because the cause of action was asserted against the receivers as officers of the United States court, and arose, as alleged, by reason of negligence on their part in the course of their receivership. It is plain, however, that the intervention was entertained as belonging to that class of proceedings recognized as allowable where property sought to be charged is in custodia legis, and not on any other ground. Although appellee's claim was purely a legal one, she did not bring an action at law, but was permitted to intervene by petition as in the assertion of a claim upon the property of fund being administered by the court. It is well settled that, where property is in the actual...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Riehle v. Margolies 1929
...to the preservation, collection, and distribution of the assets. It may do this either in the original suit, Rouse v. Letcher, 156 U. S. 47, 49, 50, 15 S. Ct. 266, 39 L. Ed. 341; or by ancillary proceedings, White v. Ewing, 159 U. S. 36, 15 S. Ct. 1018, 40 L. Ed. 67. Compare Kelley v. Gill,......
-
Matarazzo v. Hustis
... ... 164, 181 (13 ... Sup.Ct. 785, 37 L.Ed. 689); Root v. Woolworth, 150 ... U.S. 401, 413 (14 Sup.Ct. 136, 37 L.Ed. 1123); Rouse v ... Letcher, 156 U.S. 47, 49 (15 Sup.Ct. 266, 39 L.Ed ... There ... can be no doubt that suits against a receiver appointed by a ... ...
-
International Co. v. Occidental Life Ins. Co.
...to the preservation, collection, and distribution of the assets. It may do this either in the original suit, Rouse v. Letcher, 156 U.S. 47, 49, 50, 15 S.Ct. 266, 39 L.Ed. 341, or by ancillary proceedings, White v. Ewing, 159 U.S. 36, 15 S.Ct. 1018, 40 L.Ed. 67. Compare Kelley v. Gill, 245 U......
-
Bankers' Mortg. Bond Co. v. Rosenthal
... ... collection, and distribution of the assets. It may do this ... either in the original suit, Rouse v. Letcher, 156 ... U.S. 47, 49, 50, 39 L.Ed. 341, 342, 15 S.Ct. 266; or by ... ancillary proceedings, White v. Ewing, 159 U.S. 36, ... 40 L.Ed ... ...