Halsted v. Buster
Cases that cite this one
22 later published cases cite this decision.
- Avins v. Hannum (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1980)
- Crockard v. Publishers, Saturday Evening Post Magazine of Philadelphia (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1956)
- Schuckman v. Rubenstein (6th Cir. 1947)
- International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v. Donnelly Garment Co. (8th Cir. 1941)
- Kelleam v. Maryland Casualty Co. of Baltimore (10th Cir. 1940)
- Levering & Garrigues Co. v. Morrin (2d Cir. 1932)
- Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain (Supreme Court of the United States 1989)
- Taylor v. Weir (3d Cir. 1909)
- Goodman v. City of Ft. Collins (8th Cir. 1908)
- Thompson v. Automatic Fire Protection Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York 1907)
- Menard v. Goggan (Supreme Court of the United States 1887)
- Lion Bonding & Surety Co. v. Karatz (Supreme Court of the United States 1923)
- Union Manufacturing Co. v. Spies (Wis. 1923)
- Rosenberg v. Shuler (United States District Court, Oklahoma Eastern 1923)
- Walter v. Garland Automobile Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1914)
- Atchison, T. & S. F. RY. CO. v. Gilliland (9th Cir. 1912)
- Ex parte Mansfield (D.C. Cir. 1897)
- Craswell v. Belanger (9th Cir. 1893)
- Halsted v. Buster (Supreme Court of the United States 1891)
- Denny v. Pironi (Supreme Court of the United States 1891)
- Simon v. House (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Texas 1891)
- Winchester, Trustee, and Others v. Heiskell and Others (Supreme Court of the United States 1886)
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
' delivered the opinion of the court.
This record does not show that the Circuit Court had jurisdiction of the suit, which depends alone on the citizenship of the parties. In the declaration it is stated that' Halsted, the plaintiff, is a citizen of New York, but nothing is said of the citizenship of the defendants. Neither is there anything in the rest of the record to show what their citizenship actually was. For this reason the judgment is revised, but, , as the fault rests alone on the plaintiff, whose duty it wa. in bringing the suit, to make the jurisdiction appear, the reversal will be at. his cost in this court. Hancock v. Holbrook, 112 U. S. 229. If the citizenship of the defendants was, in fact, such at the commencement of. the suit as to give the Circuit Court ’ jurisdiction, it will be in the power of that court, when the case gets back, to allow the necessary amendment to be made -and .then proceed tb trial. This whole subject was recently. considered at the present, term in The Continental Life Insur *343 ance Co. v. Rhoads, ante, 237, and it is only necessary to refer now to the opinion in that case and the authorities there cited for the reasons of .this judgment.
' Reversed at the cost of the plgi/ntiff m error..
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.