Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. John F. Lacey for the motion. There is only one point involved in this motion. The plaintiff in error caused the removal of the cause from the District Court of Iowa to the United States Circuit Court. The defendant in error moved to remand the cause to the state court. This motion was submitted before Justice Miller and Judge Lorr and the motion sustained. The cause was removed and also remanded prior to the act of March 3d 1887, but the writ of error was not sued out until after the passage of that act. It follows that when the right to sue out a writ of error in a cause that had been remanded was cut off by the statute, there being no reservation in relation to any past orders the jurisdiction was cut off, and so writ of error will not lie. No one opposing.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. John F. Lacey for the motion. There is only one point involved in this motion. The plaintiff in error caused the removal of the cause from the District Court of Iowa to the United States Circuit Court. The defendant in error moved to remand the cause to the state court. This motion was submitted before Justice Miller and Judge Lorr and the motion sustained. The cause was removed and also remanded prior to the act of March 3d 1887, but the writ of error was not sued out until after the passage of that act. It follows that when the right to sue out a writ of error in a cause that had been remanded was cut off by the statute, there being no reservation in relation to any past orders the jurisdiction was cut off, and so writ of error will not lie. No one opposing.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILWAY COMPANY v. GRAY.

Since the act of March 3, 1887, 24 Stat. 552, c. 373, took effect, no appeal or writ of error lies to this court from a decision of a Circuit Court remanding a cause to a state court which had been removed from it, although the order remanding it was made before that act took effect.

MOTION TO DISMISS for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM:

This case is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

CHICAGO, BURLINGTON, QUINCY R. CO. v. GRAY
(Mar 18, 1889)