Jackson v. Twentyman
Cases that cite this one
27 later published cases cite this decision. The 24 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Lloyds Bank PLC v. Norkin (District Court, S.D. New York 1993)
- Matao Yokeno v. Sawako Sekiguchi (9th Cir. 2014)
- Engstrom v. Hornseth (District Court, D. Puerto Rico 1997)
- Buti v. Impressa Perosa, S.R.L. (District Court, S.D. New York 1996)
- Kavourgias v. Nicholaou Co. (9th Cir. 1945)
- Sanfeliz v. Bank of Nova Scotia (1st Cir. 1934)
- Doidge v. Cunard S. S. Co. (1st Cir. 1927)
- In re Glumetza Antitrust Litigation (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 2022)
- Auctus Fund, LLC v. Drone Guarder, Inc. (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2022)
- DeLagarde v. Tours VI Ltd. (District Court, Virgin Islands 2022)
- International Shipping Co. v. Hydra Offshore, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1987)
- Rowland v. Fayed (District Court, District of Columbia 1987)
- K & H Business Consultants Ltd. v. Cheltonian, Ltd. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1983)
- Sadat v. Mertes (7th Cir. 1980)
- Field v. Volkswagenwerk AG (3d Cir. 1980)
- Fuentes v. Suarez (District Court, D. Puerto Rico 1915)
- Pooley v. Luco (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California 1896)
- Stuart v. Easton (Supreme Court of the United States 1895)
- Herndon v. . Ins. Co. (N.C. 1890)
- Grace v. American Central Insurance (Supreme Court of the United States 1883)
- Texas v. Lewis (United States Circuit Courts 1882)
- Texas v. Lewis (United States Circuit Courts 1882)
- Cissel v. McDonald (United States Circuit Courts 1879)
- Blair v. West Point Manufacturing Co. (Neb. 1878)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
The Court were of opinion that the 11 th section of the act must be construed in connexion with and in ftonformity to the constitution of the United States. That by the latter, the judicial power was'not extended to private suits, in which an alien is a party, unless a citizen be the adverse party. .It was indispensable therefore. to aver the citizenship of the defendants, in order to show oh the record the jurisdiction of the court:
The omission , so to do was fatal, and according to the known course of the decisions of the Court, the judgment of the circuit court must be reversed for want of jurisdiction.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.