Case Name: Warrick Tunstall vs. the Parish of Madison
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1878-03
Citations: 30 La. Ann. 471
Docket Number: No. 6989
Parties: Warrick Tunstall vs. the Parish of Madison.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 30
Pages: 471–478

Head Matter:
No. 6989.
Warrick Tunstall vs. the Parish of Madison.
An order of a district court of the State granting the removal of a ease to the Circuit Court of the United States may be appealed from.
When an application for the removal of a suit from a State to a Bederal court is made, the State court has jurisdiction to determine the auestion whether the applicant has brought himself within the provisions of any act of Congress authorizing tho removal. But in considering this auestion, the court should only allow such allegations of fact to be put at issue, as are material to its determination. ' -
In an application for the removal of a suit from a State to a Bederal court under the act of Congress of 1867, known as the “ Local Prejudice Act,” the applicant need not swear to his citizenship. The necessary allegation as to his citizenship, need only be set forth in his pleadings.
The affidavit reauired by the “ Local Prejudice -Act,” should be made by the applicant himself. The affidavit of his attorney, that he (the attorney) has reason to believe and does believe, etc., is not sufficient.
.Bor the purposes of Bederal jurisdiction a corporation, whether political, municipal, or commercial, is regarded as a citizen of the State in which it was created, without regard to the citizenship of its members. Thus, a parish of this State is a citizen of Louisiana.
The “ good and sufficient surety ” required o£ the party who applies for the removal o£ a ease to the Federal court need only be offered in the State court by the applicant at the time of filing his petition for removal. The written obligation of such surety need only be filed, after the surety has been accepted by the court.
The affidavit required of an applicant for the removal of a case under the “ Local Prejudice Act,” maybe taken before any commissioner for this State residing in another State. Such a commissioner has authority to administer the oath.
This court will presume that the seal used by one, who styles himself, without contradiction. a commissioner of Louisiana in authenticating an affidavit made before him, as commissioner, was the seal of a commissioner of Louisiana, until the contrary is clearly, and specifically shown to this court.
APPEAL from the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, parish of Madison. Hough, J.
Seale & Morrison for plaintiff and appellee.
Geo. J. Bradfield, District Attorney pro tem., and Isaac H. Crawford and J. Hyson Lane for defendant.

Opinion:
On the Motion to Dismiss.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Marr, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the district court of Madison parish removing the cause into the circuit court of the United States. Plaintiff, appellee, moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that this court is without jurisdiction; "the jurisdiction of the State courts having ceased on filing the application and obtaining the order of removal."
In Goodrich vs. Hunton. 29 An. 372, we held that an appeal would lie from the order of removal from the State court into the circuit court, and we see no reason to doubt the correctness of that decision.
The motion to dismiss is, therefore, overruled.