The New York herald., 1879-12-16
STATE VS.. FEDERAL COURTS.
TRANSFERRED TO UNITED STATES COURTS
THE MEYER-DENIsoN CASE.

A DECISION SPECIFYING CASES THAT CAN BE
TRANSFERRED TO UNITED STATES COURTS
THE MEYER-DENIsoN CASE.
WASHINGTON. Dec. Is. 1879.
An imr ortant case decided by the CHER Justice
Of the United States Supreme Court to-day. which
settles the question to the removal of certain
causes from Stats to- federal esuyts. The decision
referred to the Meyer DsniSon suit vs. The Della
ware Construction Company. "in error to the
Supreme Court of Iowa" The litigation arose
out of the conflicting claims of the con-
struction company. which acquired q me-
chanics' lien the property Of the Delaware and
st. Paul Railroad Company. and OF Meyer Deni-
son. who trustees for the holders OF certain
bonds secured by mortgage OF the same property.
Meyer Denison fled petition, under the terms
of the act Of March g. 1876 for removal of the
on the ground that thee obstruction company and
all persons who had come in intervenors
citizens of the State of Iowa. while Meyer Dcnison
were citizens respectively Of New York and Ohio.
The State court refused to suspend proceedings.
denied the motion for removal and ordered judg-
ment in favor of the plaintiff. Upon appeal the
State Supreme Court affirmed the decree below. when
. writ of sued out to this court. Subse-
quently Meyer L. Denison tled the record in the
United States Circuit Court the District of Ohio
In which q decree secured annulling the orders
OF the State and establishing the lien of the
mortgage the mechanics lien Of the construc-
ton company. From that the construction COM
pany appealed. which case the present opinion also
covers.
In May 1875, Meyer & Denison instituted proceed
ngs in the United States Circuit Court forcclose
their mortgage aud obtained decree establishing
the superiority or the mortgage lien that OF the
construction company and setting aside the decrecs
of the State against tho trustees we'll the
Sherif's sale and deed under which the Delaware
County Railroad Company claimed. This the con-
struction company and railroad company appealed.
The questions presented sre:-
Yirst-Was tho suit pending in the State court one
which could by law be removed to the United States
Circuit Courtf
made i'll time and was it sufficient in form to effect
transfer? and.
Txvd-m the transfer was wrongfully made and
the decrees OF the Circuit Court giving the mortage
priority the mechanics lien and the tito Of
the. Delaware company right?
The provision Of the second section Of the act Of
March >, 1876 under which the petition for removal
was made reads:-
penains in ANY any State Court IN Witch % there shall
be controversy between sitisens OF dinsrea. st.tes
Of tho United States for the proper dissrieI.
| This provision, in the opinion Of this Court,
in the State court is brought is between
| citizens OF one or more States ON Que
side either party to the controversy may the
suit to the Circuit Court. without regard to the po
defendants For the purposes OF removal the matter
in dispute be ascertancd and tho parties to the
suit arranged ON opposite sides OF the dispute TX IN
such arrangement 1t appears that those sido
are all citizens OF different States from those the
other the suit may be removed. Under tho old law
tho pleadings alone were looked ut and the rights
of the parties in respect to removal
were determined solely according to the position
they occupied plaintiffs defendants In the suit.
Under the law the mere form of the pleadings
may be set aside. and the parties placed different
sides OF the matter in dispute. according to the facts
This beina done. when all those side desire
removal. IL bo had If the necessary citizenship
exists.
The Court holds that before tho trustees Of the
mortgage were actually brought into court by SER
vice Of process the dispute between the construc-
tion company and railroad company had been
finally disposed of. aud there remained only the
troversy between tho mortgage trustees, citizens OF
Pennsylvania and Ohio. on the one side. and
pany. citizens of Iowa, the other. Un-
der the construction given by tho Court
the foregoing provision of the statute the
removable by reason Of that provision. This, the
Court holds makes 1t unnecessary to give inter-
probation to tho remainder Of the same section OF
the act referred to until aproper case shall arise.
With regard To the second question this Court
holds that the petition fled sufficient In form
aud that the application was made in time.
Third TO the priority OF liens, this Court holds
that the mechan,cs' lien for work done under con-
tract takes precedence Of all encumbranccs put on
tho property by mortgage or otherwise after the
work was commenced. rs the construction company
assert mechanics lien, and that tho DEGREES Of tho
Circus Court establishing the superiority of the
lien TO the mortgage were wrong and must be re-
versed.
The stockholders Of tho Fulton. Municipal and
separately, and discussed the question OF the con.
solidation OF the gas companies OF the city.
There considerable opposition manifested At
both meetings. still q majority OF the stockholders