Supreme Court of the United States, 1887

Hancock v. Holbrook

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 10, 1887 · Waite

119 U.S. 586; 7 S. Ct. 341; 30 L. Ed. 538; 1887 U.S. LEXIS 1922 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. J. D. Bouse and Mr. William Grcmt for appellant:, Mr. Thomas J-. Semmes and Mr. Robert Mott for appellees.'

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

Boatmen's Bank v. Fritzlen (8th Cir. 1905)
Weldon v. Fritzlen (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kansas 1904)
Campbell v. Milliken (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado 1902)
Hanrick v. Hanrick (Supreme Court of the United States 1894)
Adelbert College of Western Reserve University v. Toledo, W. & W. Ry. Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio 1891)
Anderson v. Bowers (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Iowa 1890)
Young v. Parker's Administrator (Supreme Court of the United States 1889)
Thouron v. East Tennessee, V. & G. Ry. Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Tennessee 1889)
Whelan v. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co. (United States Circuit Courts 1888)
Des Moines Navigation & Railroad v. Iowa Homestead Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1887)

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

. Me. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

The order remanding this ease is affirmed. A suit cannot ■ be removed from a State Court to a Circuit Court of the United States under subsection 3 of .§ 639 of the Kevised Stat-' utes on the ground, pf “ prejudice or local influence,” unless ¿11 the plaintiffs or all the defendants are citizens of the state in which the suit was brought, and of a state other than thát of which those petitioning for the removal are citizens. Here -it appears that Hancock, the'plaintiff, oh whose petition the removal was had, is a citizen of New York,- and Eliza Jane' Holbrook and G-eorge' Nicholson,.two ,of the defendants, and those principally.interested.in-the.litigation, citizens of'Missis,-sippi, while R1W. Holbrook and Richard Fitzgerald, the other defendants, are alone citizens of Louisiana, where the suit y/as brought. These Louisiana defendants are necessary partiés to' the.suit, but, according to-the record, those who are citizens of Mississippi are- the real parties in interest. Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.