Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1883-07-01
InPOSrAHT DECISIOS.

A Cos ntet Dslweea tie State ssa HeAes.
~ Court. aud - AttsPssy - Css-
tempt.
0Yesterdsy in the Supreme Court Of APP
peal, Judge Okry johnson, President, do.
lIyered an opinion upon the petition Of A.
T.. White for a writ OF Csndsmus comPeii.
ing the CircuiaCourt Of Greenbrier county
10 proceed with the trial Of the suit for
damages brought by A. T.. White, admin
i,,iatur Of John White, against the Chesa.
peskp and Ohio railroad Company. The
suit, which "a for 200, was brought he.
!oie Judge Holt, OF The Grsenbrirr Circuit
Court, but before IL came 10 trial w. IL.
II, gsman. attorney for the Railroad Com
rany. moved TO transfer the cause 10 the
United States Court at Charleston. The
motion was resisted by the plaintiff. and
Judge Holt decided the cause not removs'
BILE. To this ruling the road sIcsp.
cs,e in the Federal Court, aid then came
into the Circuit Court with transcript a
the docket and stated that the cass had
been removed TO the United States Court.
and was therefore beyond Judge Hoss's
Jurisdiction. After oonsidsring the msttsr
Judge Holt decided that he could not pro.
ceed In the trial Of the case and % pro
noupced. A short time after the attorney
for Mr.. White spplied for Q rnandsmu!!
com pelline the Circuit judge TO proceed
with the trial OF the esuIe. Rules we're
issued by the suprsms Court both for
Judge Holt and the representative OF the
r.ilfosd company, rsturnsbls the s'th dsv
OF June, 1883.
In the meantime lodge Jackson, Of the
L. 8. Court, upon tbs petition of the roed's
attorney, Issued IN Injunction restraining
A. T.. White, tho sAministratQs, from pros.
ecutiDR bis claim IN the 6uDeoms CoaSt)
At the same time, or shortly e!hrvsroI
the case came on tse trial In the U. 3.
Court, and beoauss Of the non-tppssrsno'
OF the plsintif non-Suit was taken.
review Of ths cass, mid the Court bad cou
clsded 70 issus Q psremDAosy nsndsmui
compelling Judp Holt toproosst With the
triai OF tbs cause. He abo enlseesd -
rule sgainst Cel. HOsss,an from Jnns Soss
| to Sapter2ber z3th.
The following 40 tbsphneinai points 10
ft . Dc duty Of Q State Court. sbss
an application 10 mode 70 |. 20 remove
Gauss thsfsfYom 70 q Yedefai Court, 70 -
dieially pase upon. OIL thA quesssoes -
volsea u such appReetior-t enne
OF tbs Dstitioa and boud, and whssnes ~
/ buIyU - BO@Cly0sp poSsDs. Vs. ,sIYs ~
ton Is msds In Hze; Tho citizsaship o. u.
psrtss; the AMOUNT in contsoysfsy--t
hear tIs proof co Ill hsss 9nsstons ~
thea judicially decide wbetSera case ie'
| removal ID ma6s under the set Of Conffs:s
and II satlslsd The oase 10 rennossole: y
eptpr an ordsf rsmssisg IL. and IL s.tisncs
| tASf the ca II not removable, 70 retese =
| n,ks such order, spd proceed wa -,
case - II no aSSlicstson 70 fs~Sss hs'
been ms1s. N.
s,ste .ourt b. % decided, the oetnsfng 2
! trss4ript Of The record sne cling ~
the circuit Court ol the United otatsS - -
doGSeting the ssus there. can hsvs 20 % ~ ~
lille effect upon the turisdic'ion o. !. ~ m.
S1ste oocrt over mid csnss. ADA w -
Sutv a the State Court, svSa u nots.sa s, 2.
sucS iockstipg Of tho esuss In tue SSs
Court. 10 psy 10 attention tterrt9, .ea s.ac -
cseS 1ith ths cause - II no sr7.lfs9'n "
remove Il hsd ever ben msde'
II