Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Whilden

Fifth Circuit

Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Whilden

195 F. 263, 115 C.C.A. 254, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1377

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 9, 1912

DocketNo. 2,214

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 195 F. 263 (Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Whilden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Whilden, 195 F. 263, 115 C.C.A. 254, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1377 (5th Cir. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

SHELBY, Circuit Judge.

[1, 2] There is no claim that the Circuit Court had jurisdiction in this cause, except upon the ground that it is a controversy between citizens of different states. It is alleged that Whilden, the plaintiff below, is a citizen of the state of Florida; but neither the declaration nor any other part of the record shows under what law the defendant corporation was chartered. The averment is that it is a “corporation and citizen of the state of Virginia.” To give the court below jurisdiction, it is necessary for the record to show that the defendant corporation was created by a state whereof the plaintiff was not a citizen. When the record fails to show the jurisdiction of the court below, this court is required to reverse the judgment. Knight v. Lutcher & Moore Lumber Company, 136 Fed. 404, 406, 69 C. C. A. 248, and cases there cited: Muller v. Dows, 94 U. S. 444, 24 L. Ed. 207.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Note: The reversal of the judgment in such case does not necessarily set aside the verdict. The cause being remanded, the declaration may be amended so as to show jurisdiction. If jurisdictional averments are denied, that issue may be determined in the trial court. Atchison, T. & S. F. Railroad Company v. Gilliland, 193 Fed. 608, 113 C. C. A. 476.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SHELBY, Circuit Judge.

[1, 2] There is no claim that the Circuit Court had jurisdiction in this cause, except upon the ground that it is a controversy between citizens of different states. It is alleged that Whilden, the plaintiff below, is a citizen of the state of Florida; but neither the declaration nor any other part of the record shows under what law the defendant corporation was chartered. The averment is that it is a “corporation and citizen of the state of Virginia.” To give the court below jurisdiction, it is necessary for the record to show that the defendant corporation was created by a state whereof the plaintiff was not a citizen. When the record fails to show the jurisdiction of the court below, this court is required to reverse the judgment. Knight v. Lutcher & Moore Lumber Company, 136 Fed. 404, 406, 69 C. C. A. 248, and cases there cited: Muller v. Dows, 94 U. S. 444, 24 L. Ed. 207.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Note: The reversal of the judgment in such case does not necessarily set aside the verdict. The cause being remanded, the declaration may be amended so as to show jurisdiction. If jurisdictional averments are denied, that issue may be determined in the trial court. Atchison, T. & S. F. Railroad Company v. Gilliland, 193 Fed. 608, 113 C. C. A. 476.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 F. 263, 115 C.C.A. 254, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlantic-coast-line-r-v-whilden-ca5-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack