Sattler v. Mowry
Sattler v. Mowry
Opinion of the Court
This case involves negligence. The accident occurred in Pennsylvania. Plaintiff is a resident of Pennsylvania. Corporate defendant is a New Jersey corporation. There is a motion to dismiss because individual defendant Mowry is also a resident of Pennsylvania. Plaintiff says this defendant is a resident of Oregon. Hence, the point of decision is where does Mowry have his residence.
Whether the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action; whether it has jurisdiction over the corporate defendant Crown Motor Freight Company, Inc., were presented in extenso in the briefs, but they were not pressed or argued.
The record contains Mowry’s affidavit which shows at the time suit was started he was living in Pennsylvania. Plaintiff’s answer to the motion to dismiss denies Mowry is a resident of Pennsylvania. Then Mowry’s deposition was taken about his residence. Thus, a factual issue is presented; but there are no contra facts. Thus, on the paper record here, I do not think Frederick Hart & Co. v. Recordgraph Corp., 3 Cir., 169 F.2d 580, applies.
1. Uncontradicted facts show Mowry and wife lived in Pennsylvania until late 1954 or early 1955, when he moved to
2. About the driver’s license: Mowry had á Pennsylvania driver’s license for years, and was so licensed at the time of the accident.
3. This court lacks jurisdiction for want of diversity under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(a) (1). An order for dismissal may be submitted.
. Dep. 20.
. Dep. 7.
. Dep. 7, 9.
. Dep. 10.
. Dep. 12.
. Dep. 14.
. Dep. 17.
. Dep. 16.
. Dep. 25-28.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Anthony J. SATTLER v. Jess William MOWRY and Crown Motor Freight Company, Inc.
- Status
- Published