Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Weir Vs. Rountree

Weir vs Rountree

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Feb-28-1910
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/90905

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
216 U.S. 607
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Weir

Respondent

Rountree

Excerpt

weir v. rountree - 216 u.s. 607 (1910) u.s. supreme court weir v. rountree, 216 u.s. 607 (1910) weir v. rountree no. 769 motion to dismiss or affirm submitted february 21, 1910 decided february 28, 1910 216 u.s. 607 appeal from the united states circuit court of appeals for the eighth circuit syllabus where the circuit court would not have had jurisdiction had the allegations of diverse citizenship been stricken from the bill, the decision of the circuit court of appeals is final. appeal from 173 f. 776 dismissed. per curiam. bill was filed by the express company to restrain mrs. rountree from bringing suit against the company, which was directed to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction because there was no diversity of citizenship and no federal ground for jurisdiction. rountree v. adams express co., 165 f. 152. from this decree, no appeal was taken. a second suit on the same alleged cause of action was then brought in the name of the officers of the company, levi c. weir and others, alleging their diverse citizenship. the second suit was dismissed by the circuit court, and carried to the circuit court of appeals for the eighth circuit, and the latter court affirmed the decree of the circuit court. 173 f. 776. this appeal was then prosecuted, but we are of opinion that it cannot be maintained. colorado central consolidated mining co. v. turck, 150 u. s. 138 ; bagley v. general fire extinguisher co., 212 u. s. 477 . if the allegations which set up diversity of citizenship were stricken from the bill, the page 216 u. s. 608 federal court would have had no jurisdiction. being relied on, the decree of the circuit court of appeals was final. appeal dismissed.

Full Judgment

Weir v. Rountree - 216 U.S. 607 (1910)
U.S. Supreme Court Weir v. Rountree, 216 U.S. 607 (1910)

Weir v. Rountree

No. 769

Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted February 21, 1910

Decided February 28, 1910

216 U.S. 607

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT

OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

SYLLABUS

Where the Circuit Court would not have had jurisdiction had the allegations of diverse citizenship been stricken from the bill, the decision of the circuit court of appeals is final.

Appeal from 173 F. 776 dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

Bill was filed by the express company to restrain Mrs. Rountree from bringing suit against the company, which was directed to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction because there was no diversity of citizenship and no federal ground for jurisdiction. Rountree v. Adams Express Co., 165 F. 152. From this decree, no appeal was taken.

A second suit on the same alleged cause of action was then brought in the name of the officers of the company, Levi C. Weir and others, alleging their diverse citizenship. The second suit was dismissed by the circuit court, and carried to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and the latter court affirmed the decree of the circuit court. 173 F. 776.

This appeal was then prosecuted, but we are of opinion that it cannot be maintained. Colorado Central Consolidated Mining Co. v. Turck, 150 U. S. 138 ; Bagley v. General Fire Extinguisher Co., 212 U. S. 477 . If the allegations which set up diversity of citizenship were stricken from the bill, the

Page 216 U. S. 608

federal court would have had no jurisdiction. Being relied on, the decree of the circuit court of appeals was final.

Appeal dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial