Union Terminal Ry. Co. v. Chicago, B. & Q. R.

Citations

• 119 F. 209
• 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 5259

Syllabus

<p>1. Removal op Causes—Separable Controversy—Joint Action.</p> <p>Where a petition in a state court alleges a joint cause of action against a resident and a nonresident defendant, the cause is not removable on petition of the nonresident, unless he both alleges and proves to the satisfaction of the court that the local defendant was joined for the fraudulent purpose of preventing a removal. It is not sufficient that the petition for removal avers that the resident defendant has no interest in the controversy or that the cause of action in fact is not joint, nor that the answers raise a separable controversy or show that one of the defendants is not liable.</p> <p>2. Same—Fraudulent Joinder op Dependant to Prevent Removal.</p> <p>In a proceeding by a railroad company to condemn right of way over certain lands, under Rev. St. Mo. 1899, § 1264, which provides that it shall not be necessary to make any persons defendants, unless they are either in actual possession of the premises, claiming title, .or have a title of record, two railroad companies, one a foreign, and the other a local, corporation, were made defendants. It was not alleged that the local company was in possession, claiming title, and there was of record in the proper records of the county a deed which plaintiff’s counsel examined before suit, by which such company had conveyed to its codefendant all of its property, real or personal, of whatever kind and wherever situated, together with all its rights and franchises, except its franchise to be a corporation. Nothing appeared from said deed to afford any reasonable ground for belief that any interest in or connected with the property which could be condemned by plaintiff remained in the local company. 1Held, that the conclusion must be drawn as matter of law, from such facts, that the improper and unnecessary joinder of such company was for the purpose of preventing a removal of the cause by the nonresident defendant.</p> <p>¶ 1. Separable controversy as