Munford Rubber Tire Co. v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.
130 F. 496, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4824
Opinion
The plaintiff is a citizen of Georgia; the defendants are citizens of other states, none of them being a citizen of Georgia. We hate then a controversy wholly between citizens of different states. I am unable to distinguish this case from Ins. Co. v. Champlin (C. C.) 21 Fed. 85. Subsequently followed in this circuit in Garner v. Bank (C. C.) 66 Fed. 369, and Trust Co. v. Mackay, 70 Fed. 801.
The motion to remand is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Munford Rubber Tire Co. v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co., 130 F. 496, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4824 (circtsdny 1904).
130 F. 496 (Munford Rubber Tire Co. v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mutual Life Ins. v. Champlin
21 F. 85 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1884)
Garner v. Second Nat. Bank of Providence
66 F. 369 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1895)