Mollan v. Torrance
22 U.S. 537 (1824)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Mollan v. Torrance, 22 U.S. 9 Wheat. 537 537 (1824)

Mollan v. Torrance

22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 537

Syllabus

An endorsee of a promissory note who resides in a different state may sue, in the circuit court his immediate endorser, residing in the state in which the suit is brought, although that endorsee be a resident of the same state with the maker of the note.

But where the suit is brought against a remote endorser and the plaintiff in his declaration traces his title through an intermediate endorser, he must show that this intermediate endorser could have sustained his action in the circuit court.

A plea to the jurisdiction of the circuit court must show that the parties were citizens of the same state at the time the action was brought, and not merely at the time of the plea pleaded. The jurisdiction depends upon the state of things at the time of the action brought, and after it is once vested, it cannot be ousted by a subsequent change of residence of either of the parties

Page 22 U. S. 538

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.