Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 5/10/1893

Byers v. McAuley

Citations

  • 149 U.S. 608
  • 13 S. Ct. 906
  • 37 L. Ed. 867
  • 1893 U.S. LEXIS 2331

Syllabus

<p>It is a rule of general application, that where property is in the actual, possession of a court of competent jurisdiction, such possession cannot- . be disturbed by process issued out of another court.</p> <p>An administrator appointed by a state court is an officer of that court; his-possession of the decedent’s property is the possession of that court; and as such it cannot be disturbed' by process issued out of a Federal court.</p> <p>The jurisdiction of the Federal courts is a limited jurisdiction, depending either upon the existence of a Federal question or the diverse citizen-ships of the parties; and where these elements of jurisdiction are wanting, it cannot proceed, even with the consent of the parties.</p> <p>Federal courts have no original jurisdiction in respect to the administration' of decedents’ estates, and they cannot by entertaining jurisdiction of a suit against the administrator, which they haye ,the power to do in certain cases, draw to themselves the full possession of the res, or invest themselves with the authority of determining all claims against, it.</p> <p>A citizen of another State may proceed in the Federal courts to establish a. debt against the estate, but the debt thus established must take its place- and share in the estate as administered by the probate court ; it cannot, be enforced by direct process against the estate itself.</p> <p>Therefore a distributee, citizen of another State, may establish his right to-a share in the estate, and enforce such adjudication against the administrator-personally or his sureties, or against other persons liable therefor, or proceed in any way which does not disturb the actual possession of' the property by the.state court.</p> <p>In this case it was reversible error for the Circuit Court to take any action or make any decree looking to the mere administration of the estate, or to attempt to adjudicate as between themselves the rights of the litigants who were citizens of the State of .Pennsy

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that federal courts do not have the power to “take possession of property in the hands of an administrator appointed by the state court, and thus dispossess that court of its custody”
  • “Possession of the res draws to the court having possession all controversies concerning the res.”
  • “The jurisdiction of the federal courts is a limited one, depending upon either the existence of a federal question or diverse citizenship of the parties. Where these elements are wanting, it cannot proceed, even with the consent of the parties.”
  • “An administrator appointed by a state court is an officer of that court. His possession of the decedent’s property is a possession taken in obedience to the orders of that court. It is the possession of the court, and it is a possession which cannot be disturbed by any other court.”
  • “An administrator appointed by a state court is an officer of that court. His possession of the decedent’s property is a possession taken in obedience to the orders of that court. It is the possession of the court, and it is a possession which cannot be disturbed by any other court.”
  • “An administrator appointed by a state court is an officer of that court. His possession of the decedent’s property is a possession taken in obedience to the orders of that court. It is the possession of the court, and it is a possession which cannot be disturbed by any other court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bee, Shiras, Jackson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

221 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.