TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Horne v. George H. Hammond Co.

Horne v. George H. Hammond Company

Horne v. George H. Hammond Co., 155 U.S. 393 (1894)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
December 17, 1894
Docket
No. 86
Judges
The Chief Justice:
Citations
155 U.S. 39315 S. Ct. 16739 L. Ed. 1971894 U.S. LEXIS 2283
Syllabus
When the transcript of the record does not show that the Circuit Court had jurisdiction of a suit, where jurisdiction depends upon citizenship, and counsel, upon their attention being called to the matter, furnish nothing of record to supply the defect, the judgment must be reversed at the costs of the plaintiff in error, and the cause remanded to the Circuit Court for further proceedings.
Summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. The .case is stated in the opinion.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion

The Chief Justice :

The title of this cause describes plaintiff in error as “of Chelsea in said district,” and the decedent as “ late of Chelsea,” and the defendant as “ a corporation organized. under the laws of the State of Michigan.” The writ and the original declaration do not appear in the record. The amended declaration commences thus: “ Plaintiff says that she is the widow of the late Granville P. Horne of Chelsea, Suffolk County, Comtaonwealth of Massachusetts, and that she was duly appointed by the probate court of Suffolk County administratrix of his estate.”

As the transcript of the record does not show that the Circuit Court had jurisdiction of ..the suit, which depended upon the citizenship of the parties, and as counsel, upon having their attention called to the matter, have furnished nothing of record which would Supply the defect, the judgment must be reversed at the costs of plaintiff in error, and the cause be remanded to the Circuit Court for further proceedings.

Rob *394 ertson v. Cease, 97 U. S. 646, 649 ;

Anderson v. Watt, 138 U. S. 694, 702 ;

Timmons v. Elyton Land Co., 139 U. S. 378 ;

Denny v. Pironi, 141 U. S. 121 .

Reversed a/nd ordered accordingly.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 24 cases

View all citing references →
1894: 11895: 21896: 21900: 11903: 11904: 21905: 11907: 11908: 11911: 11912: 21914: 11923: 11925: 11926: 11930: 11932: 11936: 11948: 12001: 118942026peak 1895 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Woods v. First Nat. Bank of Albuquerque, N. M.16 F.2d 856 (9th Cir. 1926)
  2. Meltzer v. Continental Insurance163 F. Supp. 2d 523 (E.D. Pa. 2001)
  3. Babe v. Danaher56 F.2d 758 (2d Cir. 1932)
  4. Foreman v. Mesirow167 F.2d 711 (5th Cir. 1948)
  5. Columbia Digger Co. v. Rector215 F. 618 (W.D. Wash. 1914)
  6. McEldowney v. Card193 F. 475 (1911)

Most recent

  1. Meltzer v. Continental Insurance163 F. Supp. 2d 523 (E.D. Pa. 2001)
  2. Foreman v. Mesirow167 F.2d 711 (5th Cir. 1948)
  3. Tysko v. Royal Mail Steam Packet Co.81 F.2d 960 (9th Cir. 1936)
  4. Babe v. Danaher56 F.2d 758 (2d Cir. 1932)
  5. Kennedy v. Kennedy23 S.W.2d 1089 (Mo. Ct. App. 1930)
  6. Woods v. First Nat. Bank of Albuquerque, N. M.16 F.2d 856 (9th Cir. 1926)

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 4

DepthCaseCited by
Robertson v. Cease, 97 U.S. 646 (1878) 209
Anderson v. Watt, 138 U.S. 694 (1891) 187
Denny v. Pironi, 141 U.S. 121 (1891) 54
Timmons v. Elyton Land Co., 139 U.S. 378 (1891) 11

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