Metcalf v. Watertown
128 U.S. 586 (1888)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Metcalf v. Watertown, 128 U.S. 586 (1888)

Metcalf v. Watertown

No. 90

Argued November 20-21, 1888

Decided December 10, 1888

128 U.S. 586

Syllabus

The assignee of a judgment founded on a contract suing in a circuit or district court of the United States, on the ground of citizenship, to recover on the judgment, cannot maintain the action unless it appears affirmatively in the record that both the plaintiff and his assignor were not citizens of the same state with the defendant.

The fact that a suit is brought to recover the amount of a judgment of a court of the United States does not of itself make it a suit arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Where the original jurisdiction of a circuit court of the United States is invoked upon the sole ground that the determination of the suit depends upon some question of a federal nature, it must appear at the outset, in order to give the court jurisdiction, that the suit is one of which the court, at the time its jurisdiction is invoked, can properly take cognizance.

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.