THE CORPORATION OF NEW-ORLEANS
v.
WINTER ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court held that a citizen of the Mississippi Territory lacked standing to sue in federal circuit court, either individually or when joined with citizens who would otherwise have proper jurisdiction. Chief Justice Marshall determined that territories, like the District of Columbia, are not states within the meaning of the Constitution's diversity jurisdiction provisions, and that the joinder of capable parties with an incapable party does not cure the jurisdictional defect.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Marshall, Ch. J.,
delivered the Opinion of the court, and, after, stating the facts, proceeded as follows:
The proceedings of the court, therefore, isjayrested in limine, by a question.respecting, its jurisdiction, in the case, of Hepburn & Dundas v. Ellzey, this court determined,, on. mature consideration, that a citizen of the district of Columbia could not maintain a. suit in the circuit court of the United Stpteg., That opinion is still retained.
It has been attempted tó distinguish, a Territory from the-district of Columbia ;' but the court is of opinion, that this distinction cannot be maintained, They may .differ in. many respects, but neither, of them is a state,'in the Sense in which that term is used in the constitution. . Every reason assigned for the opinion of the court, that a citizen of Columbia was not capable of suing in the courts of the United States, under.the Judiciary Act, is equally applicable to a citizen of a territpry. Gabriel Winter, then, being a citizen of the Mississippi Territory, was incapable of maintaining a suit alone in the circuit' court of Louisiana. Is his case mended by being associated with others who are capable of suing in that court ? In the case of Strawbridge et al. v. Curtis et al., it was decided, that where a joint interest is prosecuted,. the jurisdiction cannot be sustained, unless each individual be entitled to claim that jurisdiction. In this case it has been doubted, whether the parties might elect to. sue jointly or séverally. However this may be, having elected to sue jointly, the court is incapable of distinguishing their case, so far as respects jurisdiction, from one in which they were compelled to unite. The circuit court of Louisiana, therefore, had no jurisdiction of the cause, and their judgment must, on that account, be reversed, and the petition dismissed.
Judgment reversed.
b
3 Cranch, 262.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (32 total)
-
Mansfield v. Swan & Another, 111 U.S. 379 (U.S. 1884)…as a citizen of one of the States or Territories. It is consistent with this statement, that he was not a citizen of any State, lie may have been a citizen of a Territory, and, if so, the requisite citizenship would not exist. New Orleans v. Winter, 1 Wheat. 91. According to the decision in Gibson v. Bruce, 108 U. S. 561, the difference of citizenship on [*382] which the right of removal depends must have existed at the time when the suit was begun, as well as at the time of the removal. And according to t…
-
Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 3 Cranch 267 (U.S. 1806)
-
Indianapolis v. Chase Nat'l Bank, 314 U.S. 63 (U.S. 1941)…hich the statute has defined.” Healy v. Ratta, supra, at 270. In defining the boundaries of diversity jurisdiction, this Court must be mindful of this guiding Congressional policy. See Hepburn & Dundas v. Ellzey, 2 Cranch 445; New Orleans v. Winter, 1 Wheat. 91; Morris v. Gilmer, 129 U. S. 315, 328-29; Coal Company v. Blatchford, 11 Wall. 172; Shamrock Oil Corp. v. Sheets, 313 U. S. 100; and compare Old Grant v. M’Kee, 1 Pet. 248; Elgin v. Marshall, 106 U. S. 578; Healy v. Ratta, 292 U. S. 263; McNutt v. G…
Previewing 3 of 32 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence