Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Schultz v. Diehl

217 U.S. 594

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1910-04-25
Topic
general

Per Curiam. Decree reversed with costs and cause remanded to be proceeded in according to law. Jellenik v. Huron Copper Mining Company, 177 U. S. 1; 18 Stat. 470, c. 137, § 8; Code of Oregon, §§ 5064, 300, 301.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Schultz v. Diehl. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
4 opinions
SCHULTZv. DIEHL,217 U.S. 594(1910)
30 S.Ct. 694
SCHULTZv. DIEHL.
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF
OREGON.
No. 166.
Submitted by appellants April 22, 1910.
Decided April 25, 1910.
Under the act of March 3, 1875, c. 137,18 Stat. 470, the Circuit Court may have jurisdiction of an action brought by a resident of one State against a corporation organized under the laws of another State and stockholders of that corporation for the purpose of removing encumbrances from the property of the corporation in the District in which the suit is brought, even if some of the stockholders are not residents of the District in which they are sued.Jellenikv.Huron Copper Mining Co.,177 U.S. 1.
THE plaintiffs and appellants brought this case as minority
stockholders of the Highland Gold Mines Company, a private
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Oregon, against the Highland Gold Mines Company, said
corporation, and its officers and directors.
It is charged in the bill of complaint that the defendant
Crawford, who was the attorney and legal advisor of the company,
conspired with defendants Diehl, Grabill and Sorrensen, officers
and directors of the company, to fabricate false and fictitious
claims against the company on which judgment was obtained; that
the object and purpose of said defendants was to use the judgment
as a means of obtaining title in themselves to the company's
property.
Other fraudulent acts were also charged.
Upon the trial defendants Diehl and Grabill moved to dismiss
as to them because the court did not have jurisdiction over them
for the reason that they had not been sued in the district in
which either of them resided or of
Page 595
which they were residents or inhabitants, it appearing from the
bill that they were citizens of Pennsylvania. The court sustained
the motion.
Mr. Charles W. FultonandMr. Douglas W. Baileyfor appellants.

No appearance for appellees.
Per Curiam.
Decree reversed with costs and cause remanded to be proceeded in according to law.Jellenikv.Huron CopperMining Company,177 U.S. 1;18 Stat. 470, c. 137, § 8; Code of Oregon, §§ 5064, 300, 301.