Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Stuart v. Easton

156 U.S. 46

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1895-01-21
Topic
general

The Chief Justice : Plaintiff in error is described throughout the record as “ a citizen of London, England,” and the defendants as “corporations of the State of Pennsylvania.” As the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court confessedly depended *47 on the alienage of plaintiff in error, and that fact was not made affirmatively to appear, the judgment must be reversed at the costs of plaintiff in error, and the cause be remanded to the Circuit Court with leave to apply for amendment and for further proceedings. Bingham v. Cabot, 3 Dall. 382; Mossman v. Higginson, 4 Dall. 12; Capron v. Van Noorden, 2 Cranch, 125; Jackson v.

Citator

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

Cited by
20 opinions
STUART v. EASTON,156 U.S. 46(1895)
15 S.Ct. 268
STUARTv. EASTON.
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT
OF PENNSYLVANIA.
No. 151.
Argued January 15, 1895.
Decided January 21, 1895.
An averment that the plaintiff is "a citizen of London, England," is not sufficient to give the Circuit Court jurisdiction on the ground of his alienage, the defendant being a citizen; and on the question being raised in this court, the case may be remanded with leave to apply to the Circuit Court for amendment and for further proceedings.
THE case is stated in the opinion.
Mr. C. Berkeley TaylorandMr. A.T. Freedley, (with whom wasMr. W. Brooke Rawleon the brief,) for plaintiff in error.Mr. H.J. Steelefor defendants in error.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Plaintiff in error is described throughout the record as "a citizen of London, England," and the defendants as "corporations of the State of Pennsylvania." As the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court confessedly dependedPage 47on the alienage of plaintiff in error, and that fact was not made affirmatively to appear, the judgment must be reversed at the costs of plaintiff in error, and the cause be remanded to the Circuit Court with leave to apply for amendment and for further proceedings.Binghamv.Cabot, 3 Dall. 382;Mossmanv.Higginson, 4 Dall. 12;Capronv.Van Noorden, 2 Cranch, 125;Jacksonv.Twentyman, 2 Pet. 136;Conollyv.Taylor, 2 Pet. 556;Brownv.Keene, 8 Pet. 115;Robertsonv.Cease,97 U.S. 646;Börsv.Preston,111 U.S. 252,263;Dennyv.Pironi,141 U.S. 121;Hornev.George H. HammondCo.,155 U.S. 393.Judgment reversed.