Case Name: PLANT v. HARRISON et al.
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1900-02-03
Citations: 101 F. 307
Docket Number: 
Parties: PLANT v. HARRISON et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 101
Pages: 307–307

Head Matter:
PLANT v. HARRISON et al.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
February 3, 1900.)
1. Jurisdiction op Federal Courts — Suit to Establish Will.
Whether a federal court lias original jurisdiction to entertain a suit in which it is sought to establish a certain document as a will, quaere.
2. Removal of Causes — Remand.
Where doubt exists as to the jurisdiction of a federal court to entertain a suit removed from a state court, it will be remanded.
On Motion to Remand to State Court.
John E. Parsons and William D. Guthrie, for the motion.
Louis Cass Ledyard and Maxwell Evarts, opposed.
As lo probate jurisdiction, of federal court, see note to Bedford Quarries Co. v. Thomlinson, 36 C. C. A. 276.

Opinion:
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.
Under the Acts of 1887 and 1888 there can he no removal where the controversy is not one of which the circuit court would have original jurisdiction. The suit or action now under consideration seeks, among' other things, the establishment of a certain document as a will. Whether this court would have jurisdiction to entertain such a suit, and administer so much of the relief prayed for, seems to be a question not altogether free from doubt upon the authorities. Where doubt exists, the practice in this district is to remand. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. Hoffman House (Jan. 16, 1894, unreported), where the opinion of Judge Caldwell in Fitzgerald v. Railway Co. (C. C.) 45 Fed. 812, was concurred in and followed. The motion to remand is granted.