Little v. Giles

Citations

• 118 U.S. 596
• 7 S. Ct. 32
• 30 L. Ed. 269
• 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1951

Syllabus

<p>A suit in a State court against several defendants, some of whom are citizens of the same State with the plaintiff, charging all as joint contractors or joint trespassers, cannot be removed into a Federal court by defendants who are citizens of another State, although they allege in their petition for removal that they are not jointly interested or liable with the other defendants, and that their controversy with the plaintiff is a separate one.</p> <p>When it appears that the interest of a nominal party to a suit is simulated and collusive, and created for the purpose of giving jurisdiction to a court of the United States, the court should dismiss the suit under the provisions of § 5, Act of March 3, 1875, 18 Stat. 472. Farmington v. Pillsbury, 114 U. S. 138, affirmed.</p> <p>After removal of a cause in equity from a State court to a court of the United States, a motion was made under § 5, Act of March 3,1875, to remand it, on the ground that the title of one of the parties had been collusively acquired for the purpose of removal from the State court. A suit at law involving the same subject-matter was then pending in the Federal court. The same issue of collusion had been made in that cause by a plea in abatement, and the parties stipulated that the issue on the plea in abatement should be tried and that the decision thereon should be taken and entered of record as the decision in the action at law, and also of the issues in the suit in equity as far as they were the same. The trial of the issues on the plea resulted in a finding that the plea had not been sustained, and this, together with all the evidence, being incorporated into the equity suit, the motion to remand the latter was denied : Held, That there was nothing in the stipulation to deprive this court of the power of reviewing the action of the court below in denying the motion.</p>