PIERRE GASSIES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR
v.
JEAN GASSIES BALLON, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

U.S. | 1832-01-01
6 Pet. 761 Supreme Court of the United States (1832) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 8 L. Ed. 573 · 1832 U.S. LEXIS 499 · SCDB 1832-052
Cited by 24 cases
Opinion of the Court
Mr Chief Justice Marshall

Mr Chief Justice Marshall delivéred the opinion of the Court.

In. this case the court is of opinion that the jurisdiction can be sustained. The. defendant in error is alleged in the proceedings to be a citizen of the United States, naturalized in Louisiana, and .residing there. This is equivalent to an averment that he is a citizen of that state.' A citizen of the United States, residing in any state of the union, is a citizen of that state.

'The authorities on this question have gone far enough; and this court is not disposed to narrow any moire the limitations which have been imposed by the decided cases. They have gone as far as it would be reasonable and proper to go. The judgment of the district court of Louisiana is affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (13 total)

  • Krasnov v. Dinan, 465 F.2d 1298 (3d Cir. 1972)
    …ough v. Strathmann Supply Co., 358 F. 2d 374 (3d Cir. 1966). One domiciled in a state when a suit is begun is “a citizen of that state within the meaning of the Constitution, art. 3, § 2, and the Judicial Code . . . (Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Pet. 761, 8 L.Ed. 573; Boyd v. Nebraska, 143 U.S. 135, 161, 36 L.Ed. 103, 109, 12 S.Ct.Rp. 375; Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 22 L.Ed. 627.) . ” Williamson v. Osenton, 232 U.S. 619, 624, 34 S.Ct. 442, 58 L.Ed. 758 (1914); Pemberton v. Colonna, 290 F. 2d 220 (3d Cir.…
  • Williamson v. Osenton, 232 U.S. 619 (U.S. 1914)
    …emising that if the plaintiff was domiciled in Virginia when this suit was begun she was a citizen of that State within the meaning of the Constitution, Art. III, § 2, and the Judicial Code of March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1087; Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Pet. 761; Boyd v. Thayer, 142 U. S. 135, 161; Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162; we will take these questions up in turn. The essential fact that raises a change of abode to a change of domicil is the absence of any intention to live elsewhere, Story on Con…
  • Marshall v. The Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 16 How. 314 (U.S. 1853)
    …the real defendants are citizens of that State. This form of averment has been used for many years. Any established form of words used for the expression of a particular fact, is a'sufficient averment of it in law. In the case of Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Pet. 761, the petition alleged that “ the defendant had caused himself to be naturalized an American citizen, and that he was at the time of filing the petition residing in the parish of West Baton Rouge.” This was held to be a sufficient averment that he wa…

Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw