Kleiber v. McManus

Citations

• 66 Tex. 48
• 17 S.W. 249
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 437

Syllabus

<p>1. Removal of causes—Federal courts—Order remanding—State courts— Jurisdiction—Although the order made by a state court in response to an application for removal of a suit therein pending to a federal court was properly granted, the refusal of the federal court to receive the case, or its order remanding it, acquiesced in by the parties, re-vests the state court with power to proceed with the cause, as fully as if its jurisdiction had never been interrupted. (Citing Thatcher v. McWilliams, 47 Ga., 306, and Ins. Co. v. Francis, 52 Miss., 457.)</p> <p>1. Jurisdiction of supreme court—Interlocutory judgments—Appeal—Mandamus—The supreme court has appellate jurisdiction to revise an interlocutory order of the district court refusing to proceed with a cause therein pending, and, if the action of the latter court is found to be erroneous, to correct the error by a writ of mandamus.</p> <p>3. Same—Practice—This appellate jurisdiction is invoked by an application accompanied by a transcript of such parts of the record as illustrate the error complained of, and, in a proper case, the issuance of a citation or notice to the adverse party. Upon a rule by the court, or the fiat°of one of the judges, an order to show cause is issued, and, on the return thereof, the matter in issue is adjudicated by the court, and a writ of mandamus awarded or refused, as the case may require.</p>