Bailey v. Willeford

Citations

• 126 F. 803
• 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 5202

Syllabus

<p>1. Federal Courts — Jurisdiction—Diversity of Citizenship — Judgment-Injunction — Conspiracy.</p> <p>Defendant was sued in a state court for enticing plaintiff’s daughter, and, though entitled to remove the cause to the federal courts, he answered in the state court, consented to a trial, and after verdict against him made a motion to set the same aside and for a new trial. These being denied, he appealed to the state Supreme Court, where the judgment was affirmed. Thereafter defendant obtained an affidavit from plaintiff’s daughter that her testimony had been false, and that she had been coerced by her father to testify as she did. On this and other evidence defendant applied in the state court to set aside the judgment for fraud and perjury, and appealed from an order denying his motion, and brought suit in equity in the state court to set the judgment aside. He also moved the state court to restrain execution, which was denied, and appealed from such order to the state Supreme Court, which appeals were pending when he filed a bill for an injunction in the federal court to restrain the enforcement of the judgment on the ground that it was obtained by fraud, conspiracy, and perjury, alleging the same facts as had been presented to the state court in the previous proceedings for a new trial, etc. Seld, that defendant, having elected to litigate the whole matter in the state courts, and having fully presented his entire case to those courts, the federal court would not take jurisdiction.</p> <p>¶ 1. Diverse citizenship as ground of federal jurisdiction, see notes to Shipp v. Williams, 10 C. C. A. 249; Mason v. Dullagham, 27 C. C. A. 298.</p>