S. Patti Const. Co. v. Union Pac. R. Co., 4687
| Decision Date | 23 May 1947 |
| Docket Number | 4688.,No. 4687,4687 |
| Citation | 72 F. Supp. 101 |
| Parties | S. PATTI CONST. CO., Inc. v. UNION PAC. R. CO. (two cases). |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri |
A. E. Bazan, of Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiff.
Watson, Ess, Barnett, Whittaker & Marshall and Louis L. Poplinger, all of Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.
The motions to remand in the above entitled cases raise identical questions. By paragraph (a) of the motions the movants quote from the petition for removal and apparently challenge the jurisdiction of the court, because, as it is intimated, the defendant did not file the records in this court "within thirty (30) days from the filing of this petition."
Another paragraph of the motions to remand indicates that counsel for the defendant questions whether or not the federal court had jurisdiction of the subject matter. It is apparently the contention that the state court also had jurisdiction. These will be considered.
1. The actions were instituted on February 12, 1947. Summonses were issued and served on the defendant on February 14, 1947. The petitions for removal were filed on March 10, 1947. Under the rule of the state court, and according to the recital of the summons in each case, the defendant had 30 days from the 14th day of February, 1947, in which to plead. This meant that the defendant could plead any time up to and including March 17, 1947. The record shows, however, that the defendant filed its petitions for removal on March 10, 1947, and in said petition in each of the above cases there was the recital: "Your petitioner offers herein a bond, with good and sufficient surety, conditioned for its entering in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Missouri, within thirty (30) days from the filing of this petition, a verified copy of the record in this suit * * *."
The file marks of the clerk of this court show that the verified copy of the record in each case was filed on April 8, 1947, whereas the defendant had up to and including April 9th within which to file a certified copy of the record. Quite clearly the verified copies of the records were filed on time.
2. These suits, being for a refund of certain freight tariffs collected by the defendant, are governed by the 8th sub-division of Section 41, Title 28 U.S.C.A., which confers upon the federal court jurisdiction "Of all suits and proceedings arising under any law regulating commerce." Quite clearly these actions arise under said provision of the statute.
Plaintiff i...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eickhof Construction Co. v. Great Northern Railway Co.
...of allegedly incorrect or discriminatory rates is within the jurisdiction of a federal district court. S. Patti Construction Co. v. Union P. R. Co., 72 F.Supp. 101 (W.D.Mo. 1947); National Elevator Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 246 F. 588 (8th Cir. Yet, with slight variations in fact,......
-
Gibson v. First Federal Savings and Loan Association
...See Bernstein Bros. Pipe & Machinery Co. v. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co., 193 F.2d 441 (10th Cir. 1951); S. Patti Const. Co. v. Union Pac. R. Co., 72 F.Supp. 101 (W.D.Mo.1947). The Second Circuit went even further in Ivy Broadcasting Co. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., 391 F.2d 486 (2n......
-
ORLEANS MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT CO. v. Isthmian Lines, Inc.
...Auto Parts v. Chicago, B & Q R. Co., D.Minn., 139 F.Supp. 521, none of which involve removal cases, and S. Patti Construction Co. v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., W.D.Mo., 72 F.Supp. 101, which does involve a removed case. To the extent that those cases do not relate to the removal jurisdicti......
- Walling v. Wyandotte Furniture Co.