The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-08-13

| An important opinion was rendered yes
tcrday morning by Judge Thomas e..
Jones of the United States Court.
The case is that of William Thompson
against the Southern Railway in the
United States Circuit Court fer the North
ern Division of the Northern District of
Alabama.
The head notes are as follows:
l. Under the Alabama Code. a passen-
ger may unite claims for separate in
juries in one suit and declare on the diff
ferent causes Of action in separate
counts in the same complaint; and as
IL Is possible for a passenger to receive
several like injuries on the same day, on
a trip between two railroad stations, the
complaint counting on like injuries In DIFF
ferent counts, cannot be assumed, as mat
ter of law, to refer to one injury only.
2. Though the court be morally salts
fed that a complaint containicG separate
counts in fact. intends 20 declare upon
injury only, yet It is not justified in re-
manding the cause to the state Court in
consequence of such moral conviction:
and can only do so upon evidence which
proves to a legal certairtH" that the
entire complaint in fact RS! ties to only
one injury. as to which suh1cient
amount of damages is net claimed to
bring the case within the Jurisdiction.
8. In this case. the complaint Joined In
separate counts causes of action result
ing from like injuries, received by the
plaintiff on the same day on Defendants
road no one count olaiming damages to
an amount within the ju,: t!ction. but
aggregating a sufficient a'E"'.nt II the
claims in any two of the counts were
considered Held that the one could not
be remanded. on the ground THAT the COM
plant showed on its face that II presented
a controversy not within the jurisdiction
of the court
Statement of the Case.
The complaint filed in this suit in the
State Court contains five counts In each
count plaintiff, Thompson, claims dam
ages of the defendant for personal inju-
ries sustained by him while a passenger
on the defendants road, between bel
Nina and Huntsville. Alabama. on Janu-
airy I, 1901. The first three counts claim
of the defendant "the sum of nineteen
hundred and ninety dollars damages
The fourth and fifth counts claim the
further sum of nineteen hundred and
mir ETY. dollars damages" All of the
counts refer to injuries to plaintiffs ear
a. follows: "Impairing his hearing In
one ear rendering him almost totally
deaf In one ear" almost total loss OF
hearing in one ear"--permanently in
jul ed by loss of hearing in one ear" Sew
eral of the counts conclude with the
words, "all to the plaintiffs damage
aforesaid" The defendants petition. on
which the case was removed. states,
among other things that "the amount in
dispute in this cose exceeds the sum of
two thousand dollars. exclusive OF inter
est and costs" The petition is sworn to
by an attorney of the defendant who
states that ''the statements therein ar }
true IF his own knowledge. except as to
matters alleged on information and be
lief. ard as to those matters he believes
them to be true"
Plaintiff moves to remand the cause on
several grounds, which all resolve them =
selves into the objection that 'the Uni
ted States Court has no jurisdiction of
this cause as shown by the complaint or
declarations; for the amount In contro-
versy is below the iurisdctional sum of
two thousand dollars, and the amount in
volved or claimed in plaintiffs complaint
or declaration is nineteen hundred and
ninety dollars" Another ground of the
motion tn remand is that the allegation
in the petition for removal is untrue and
In conflict with the plain averments of
plaintiffs complaint or declaration, and
that for the purpose of the hearing on