Denny v. Pironi
Citations
- 141 U.S. 121
- 11 S. Ct. 966
- 35 L. Ed. 657
- 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2505
Syllabus
<p>When the pleadings in an action in a Circuit Court of the United States fail tchshow averments of diverse citizenship necessary to give the court jurisdiction, the fault cannot be cured by making such an averment in a remittitur by the plaintiff of a portion of the judgment.</p> <p>While it is not necessary that the essential facts, necessary to give a Circuit Court jurisdiction on the ground of diverse citizenship • should be averred in the pleadings, they must appear in such papers as properly constitute the record on which judgmént is entered, and not in averments which are improperly and surreptitiously introduced into the record for the purpose of healing a defect in this particular. The cases on this subject reviewed.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Citizenship, not residence, is the key fact that must be alleged in the complaint to establish diversity for a natural person.”
- trial court could allow amendment in its discretion
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brown
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
48 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-LarrainSupreme Court· 1989-08-11· cited 1,435×
- Travaglio v. American Express Co.Eleventh Circuit· 2013-08-19· cited 425×
- Shaw v. Quincy Mining Co.Supreme Court· 1892-05-16· cited 303×
- Norton v. LarneySupreme Court· 1925-01-05· cited 230×
- Gregory Heinen v. Northrop GrummanSeventh Circuit· 2012-02-07· cited 202×
- Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. EdwardsSupreme Court· 1904-05-16· cited 190×
- Guaranty National Title Company, Inc. v. J.E.G. AssociatesSeventh Circuit· 1996-11-15· cited 180×
- America's Best Inns, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., Cross-AppellantSeventh Circuit· 1992-11-17· cited 136×
- Steigleder v. McQuestenSupreme Court· 1905-04-24· cited 132×
- Winforge, Inc. v. Coachmen Industries, Inc.Seventh Circuit· 2012-07-30· cited 84×
- Pamela J. Tylka, H. Joshua Chaet, Cheryl Keller v. Gerber Products Company, a Michigan CorporationSeventh Circuit· 2000-05-01· cited 77×
- Levering & Garrigues Co. v. MorrinSecond Circuit· 1932-08-23· cited 77×
- Wells v. Universal Pictures Co.Second Circuit· 1948-03-16· cited 48×
- Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alejandro Alfonzo-Larrain R.Seventh Circuit· 1988-08-11· cited 35×
- Thomas v. AndersonEighth Circuit· 1915-05-03· cited 32×
- McEldowney v. CardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Tennessee· 1911-09-21· cited 25×
- Horne v. George H. Hammond Co.Supreme Court· 1894-12-17· cited 24×
- Stuart v. EastonSupreme Court· 1895-01-21· cited 20×
- Harding v. Standard Oil Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois· 1910-10-25· cited 20×
- Reason v. General Motors Corp.S.D. Indiana· 1995-07-17· cited 19×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Steamship Co. v. TugmanSupreme Court· 1882-11-18· cited 226×
- Robertson v. CeaseSupreme Court· 1878-11-18· cited 222×
- Continental Insurance v. RhoadsSupreme Court· 1886-11-29· cited 96×
- Parker v. OvermanSupreme Court· 1856-01-22· cited 83×
- Everhart v. Huntsville CollegeSupreme Court· 1887-01-31· cited 40×
- Menard v. GogganSupreme Court· 1887-04-11· cited 35×
- Peper v. FordyceSupreme Court· 1886-12-13· cited 30×
- Halsted v. BusterSupreme Court· 1886-12-13· cited 25×
- Pacific Express Co. v. MalinSupreme Court· 1889-12-23· cited 21×
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.