Cayce v. Southern Ry. Co.

Citations

• 195 F. 786
• 1912 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1682

Syllabus

<p>1. Removal of Causes (§ 61*)—Separable Controversy.</p> <p>A declaration against a railroad company and a conductor and operator employed by tbe company for injury to a passenger, alleging negligence of the company in running the train at high speed, without proper lookout, and charging defendant employes’ negligence to have consisted in placing feight cars on the main line, where they collided with the passenger train, shows a separable controversy with the company, entitling it to remove the cause.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Removal of Causes, Cent. Dig. § 115; Dec. Dig. § 61.*</p> <p>Separable controversy ground for removal of cause, see notes to Robbins v. Ellenbogen, 18 C. C. A. 86; Mecke v. Valley town Mineral Co., 35 C. C. A. 155;- Pollitz v. Wabash R. Co., 100 C. C. A. 4.]</p> <p>2. Removal of Causes (§ 84*)—Application—Notice—Necessity.</p> <p>New Judicial Code (Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1087 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p. 128j), effective January 1, 1912, which requires notice of application for removal, does not apply to an order for removal made December 16, 1911.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Removal of Causes. Cent. Dig. § 164; ' Dec. Dig. § 84.*]</p>