Gay v. Ruff,
292 U.S. 25 (1934)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Gay v. Ruff, 292 U.S. 25 (1934)

Gay v. Ruff

No. 663

Argued February 12, 13, 1934

Decided April 2, 1934

292 U.S. 25


1. A judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals directing that a case be remanded by the District Court to a state court from which it was removed, is reviewable in this Court by certiorari. P. 28.

2. When a reading of a statutory amendment with the old context and with other statutes bearing on the subject raises a doubt as to whether its literal meaning was intended, resort may be had to the legislative history. P. 292 U. S. 31.

3. Section 33 of the Judicial Code, providing for removal before trial or final hearing from state to federal courts of civil and criminal

Page 292 U. S. 26

action commenced against revenue officers on account of acts done by them under color of their office or under any revenue law, etc., or commenced against any person for or on account of anything done by him while an officer of either House of Congress in the discharge of his official duty in executing any order of such House, was amended in 1916 to include any civil or criminal action against

"any officer of the courts of the United States for or on account of any act done under color of his office or in the performance of his duties as such officer."

Held: that the amendment does not embrace an action against the receiver of a railroad appointed by a federal court where the purpose of the action is merely to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from negligence of the defendant's employees in operating a train. Bette v. Wells Fargo Bank, 270 U. S. 438, distinguished. Pp. 292 U. S. 32-39.

4. Prior to 1916, § 33 was applicable only when the person defending caused it to appear that his defense was that, in doing the acts charged, he was doing no more than his duty under the revenue laws or the orders of Congress. The amendment of 1916 is to be construed in pari materia. Pp. 292 U. S. 33, 292 U. S. 35.

5. If the amendment were construed as authorizing removal in the case at bar, it would introduce into § 33 a wholly different ground of jurisdiction; would in effect repeal by implication legislation which deals expressly with suits against receivers, and depart from the established trend of legislation limiting the jurisdiction of the federal courts. P. 292 U. S. 35.

67 F.2d 684 affirmed.

Certiorari, 291 U.S. 654, to review a judgment reversing a judgment recovered in the District Court, 3 F.Supp. 264, against the receiver of a railroad in an action for personal injuries, and directing that the cause be remanded to a state court from which the receiver had removed it.

Page 292 U. S. 27

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.