SHOSHONE MINING CO. V. RUTTER, 177 U. S. 505 (1900)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 177 U. S. 505
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/177/505/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/177/505/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Shoshone Mining Co. v. Rutter, 177 U.S. 505 (1900)
Shoshone Mining Co. v. Rutter
No. 208
Argued March 21, 1900
Decided April 30, 1900
177 U.S. 505
Syllabus
A suit brought in support of an adverse claim under Rev.Stat. §§ 2325, 2326, is not a suit arising under the laws of the United States in such a sense as to confer jurisdiction on a federal court, regardless of the citizenship of the parties.
Blackburn v. Portland Gold Mining Co., 175 U. S. 571, reexamined and affirmed to this point.
Although suits like the present one may sometimes so present questions arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States that a federal court will have jurisdiction, yet the mere fact that a suit is an adverse suit, authorized by the statutes of Congress, is not, in and of itself, sufficient to vest jurisdiction in the federal courts.
The case is stated in the opinion.