Boice v. Boice
BOICE v. BOICE Et Al.
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
The order of the district court dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint which seeks an interpleader between the defendants must be affirmed for the reasons well stated in the opinion of Judge Fake, D.C., 48 F.Supp. 183 . We think also that the dismissal was right because of an absence of diversity of citizenship between the plaintiff and one of the defendants, Edith Gibby Boice. This is not a case of strict interpleader in which the plaintiff appears as a mere stakeholder without any interest in a controversy between defendants whose diversity of citizenship satisfies the statute. Treines v. Sunshine Mining Co., 308 U.S. 66 , 60 S.Ct. 44 , 84 L.Ed. 85 . On the contrary this is a case of a bill in the nature of a bill of interpleader in which the plaintiff has an active controversy with respect to the subject matter of the suit with one of the defendants, Mrs. Boice. Since these parties are both citizens of New Jersey the district court was without jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
The order is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.