TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hixson v. Hixson

Grace D. HIXSON v. William Carter HIXSON and UNITED STATES of America, Defendants UNITED STATES of America, Counter-Claimant and Cross-Claimant v. Grace D. HIXSON, Counter-Defendant, and William Carter Hixson, Cross-Defendant

Hixson v. Hixson, 170 F. Supp. 590 (S.D. Cal. 1958)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, S.D. California · Federal District Courts
Decided
January 21, 1958
Docket
No. Civ. No. 1047-57
Judges
Mathes
Citations
170 F. Supp. 5902 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 54571958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2297

Opinion of the Court — Mathes

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

MATHES, District Judge.

This cause having come before the Court for trial, and evidence having been submitted by all parties; and it appearing to the Court:

(a) that defendant United States of America, as Sovereign, has never consented to be sued in this or any court for a claim to declaratory judgment such as is presented in the first cause of action asserted in plaintiff’s complaint in this case [see: 28 U.S.C.A. § 2201 ; Mayer v. Wright, 9 Cir., 1958, 251 F.2d 178 ];

(b) that defendant United States of America has an unsatisfied lien for Federal income taxes against the real property as to which the plaintiff seeks a decree quieting title in the second cause of action asserted in the complaint, and the plaintiff does not make any offer to do equity as to the United States by offering to discharge such lien;

(c) that the record does not disclose diversity of citizenship between plaintiff and defendant William Carter Hixson [ 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332 ; Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 1941, 314 U.S. 63, 69-70, 76-77 , 62 S.Ct. 15 , 86 L.Ed. 47 ; Parker v. Overman, 1855, 18 How. 137 , 59 U.S. 137, 141 , 15 L.Ed. 318 ; Mullen v. Torrance, 1824, 9 Wheat. 537 , 22 U.S. 537, 538 , 6 L.Ed. 154 ; Molnar v. National Broadcasting Co., 9 Cir., 1956, 231 F.2d 684 ];

(d) that there appears no claim or cause of action asserted in the complaint which “arises under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States” [ 28 U.S.C.A. § 1331 ; Gully v. First National Bank, 1936, 299 U.S. 109, 112-114 , 57 S.Ct. 96 , 81 L.Ed. 70 ; People of Puerto Rico v. Russell & Co., 1933, 288 U.S. 476, 483-484 , 53 S.Ct. 447 , 77 L.Ed. 903 ; Taylor v. Anderson, 1914, *592 234 U.S. 74 , 34 S.Ct. 724 , 58 L.Ed. 1218 ; Hooe v. United States, 1910, 218 U.S. 322, 335-336 , 31 S.Ct. 85 , 54 L.Ed. 1055 ; Scribner v. Straus, 1908, 210 U.S. 352 , 28 S.Ct. 735 , 52 L.Ed. 1094 ; Wade v. Lawder, 1897, 165 U.S. 624 , 17 S.Ct. 425 , 41 L.Ed. 851 ; Dale Tile Mfg. Co. v. Hyatt, 1888, 125 U.S. 46 , 8 S.Ct. 756 , 31 L.Ed. 683 ; Republic Pictures Corp. v. Security etc. Bank, 9 Cir., 1952, 197 F.2d 767 ];

(e) that the identical claims asserted by defendant United States of America against counter-defendant William Carter Hixson are involved in civil action No. 17410-WM, entitled “United States of America, Plaintiff, v. William Carter Hixson, Jr., et ah, Defendants,” now pending in this Court;

It Is Ordered:

(1) that the plaintiff’s second cause of action to quiet title is hereby dismissed as to defendant United States of America for want of equity, but without costs to any party, and with the further provision that this dismissal shall not operate as an adjudication upon the merits [Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 41(b), 28 U.S. C.A.];

(2) that the counter-claim and cross-claim of defendant United States of America against counter-defendant Grace D. Hixson and cross-defendant William Carter Hixson are hereby dismissed, without costs, and this dismissal shall not operate as an adjudication upon the merits [Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 41(b), 28 U.S.C.A.];

(3) that the case, involving both causes of action as against defendant William Carter Hixson, is hereby remanded to the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Los Angeles [ 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447 ], from whence it' was removed, bearing that court’s No. S.M.C. 5594.

It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk this day serve a certified copy of this order of remand by United States mail upon the Clerk of the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Los Angeles, in accordance with 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447 (c).

It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk this day serve copies of this order by United States mail upon the attorneys for the parties appearing in this cause.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1958: 119582026peak 1958 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Coson v. United States169 F. Supp. 671 (S.D. Cal. 1958)

Most recent

  1. Coson v. United States169 F. Supp. 671 (S.D. Cal. 1958)

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.

Authorities cited 14

DepthCaseCited by
Gully v. First Nat. Bank in Meridian, 299 U.S. 109 (1936) 1,987
Mollan v. Torrance, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 537 (1824) 500
Taylor v. Anderson, 234 U.S. 74 (1914) 451
Puerto Rico v. Russell & Co., 288 U.S. 476 (1933) 201
Hooe v. United States, 218 U.S. 322 (1910) 93
Parker v. Overman, 59 U.S. (18 How.) 137 (1856) 80
Dale Tile Mfg. Co. v. Hyatt, 125 U.S. 46 (1888) 58
Wade v. Lawder, 165 U.S. 624 (1897) 54
Scribner v. Straus, 210 U.S. 352 (1908) 5
Indianapolis v. Chase Nat. Bank, 314 U.S. 63 (1941) 498
Molnar v. Nat'l Broad. Co., 231 F.2d 684 (9th Cir. 1956) 72
Republic Pictures Corp. v. Sec.-First Nat. Bank of Los Angeles, 197 F.2d 767 (1st Cir. 1952) 14
Mayer v. Wright, 251 F.2d 178 (9th Cir. 1958) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list