Horne v. George H. Hammond Co.
Annotate this Case
155 U.S. 393 (1894)
- Syllabus |
U.S. Supreme Court
Horne v. George H. Hammond Co., 155 U.S. 393 (1894)
Horne v. George H. Hammond Company
Argued November 20-21, 1894
Decided December 17, 1894
155 U.S. 393
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
When the transcript of the record does not show that the circuit court had jurisdiction of a suit, where jurisdiction depends upon citizenship, and counsel, upon their attention's being called to the matter, furnish nothing of record to supply the defect, the judgment must be reversed at the costs of the plaintiff in error, and the cause remanded to the Circuit Court for further proceedings.
The case is stated in the opinion.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER.
The title of this cause describes plaintiff in error as "of Chelsea, in said district," and the decedent as "late of Chelsea," and the defendant as "a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Michigan." The writ and the original declaration do not appear in the record. The amended declaration commences thus:
"Plaintiff says that she is the widow of the late Granville P. Horne, of Chelsea, Suffolk County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and that she was duly appointed by the Probate Court of Suffolk County administratrix of his estate."
As the transcript of the record does not show that the circuit court had jurisdiction of the suit, which depended upon the citizenship of the parties, and counsel, upon having their attention called to the matter, have furnished nothing of record which would supply the defect, the judgment must be reversed at the costs of plaintiff in error, and the cause be remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. Robertson
Reversed and ordered accordingly.