Document: 333 U.S. 163 68 S.Ct. 587 92 L.Ed. 614 SUTTLEv.REICH BROS. CONST. CO. et al. No. 214. Argued Dec. 18, 1947. Decided March 8, 1948. Rehearing Denied April 19, See 878, 900. Messrs. Charles F. Engle, of Natchez, Miss., and John D. Miller, New Orleans, La., for petitioner. Mr. George T. Owen, Jr., Baton Rouge, respondents. Chief Justice VINSON delivered the opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari in this case to consider a question arising under federal venue statutes. Petitioner, resident citizen State Mississippi, brought negligence action based on diversity citizenship District Court Eastern Louisiana. The defendants that suit were respondents Reich Bros. Construction Company, partnership, its individual members, residents Western Louisiana, Highways Insurance Underwriters, Texas Corporation which had qualified do business Louisiana pursuant statute State. 2 Section 51 Judicial Code provides '* * where jurisdiction is founded only fact between citizens different States, shall be district residence either plaintiff or defendant.'1 This general provision by § 52 Code, states if there are two more defendants, residing districts State, (suit) may district, *.'2 3 It conceded parties corporation, Insurance, having amenable courts State.3 critical issue whether regarded as 'resident' within meaning so Company members properly sued co-defendants corporation despite 4 moved dismiss ground improper venue. motion, was dismissed respondents, leaving pending against corporation. Circuit Appeals affirmed.4 5 we called upon resolve narrow one. not o nfronted with abstract whether, any circumstances purposes, foreign acquiring 'residence' other than it incorporated. Nor our problem discovering law, treated doing business.5 sole relates construction term 'residence,' appearing particular statutes consideration, applies 6 these has frequently been subject consideration period over half century. Shortly after Congress enacted substantially present form, declared statutes, 'the incorporated.'6 Thus, Shaw v. Quincy Mining Co., 1892, 145 444, 450, 12 935, 937, 36 768, said: 'This statement often reaffirmed court, some change phrase, but always retaining idea legal existence, home, domicile, habitat, residence, can state created, although whose laws permit it.' 7 For almost sixty years, an unbroken line decisions, applied same construction.7 That view recently 1946 Mississippi Publishing Corp. Murphree, 326 438, 441, 66 242, 244, 90 185.8 8 revealed similar understanding when enacting special situations intended that, at election plaintiff, should become incorporation States carrying corporate activities. In those provided such suits located corporationi 'inhabitant,' also 'found,' 'transacts business,' agent receive service process.9 9 does decision Neirbo Co. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 1939, 308 165, 60 153, 84 167, 128 A.L.R. 1437, require construed differently. case, plaintiffs, Jersey, defendant, Delaware Southern York. held requirements waived since appointed process York might insist being Delaware, incorporation, plaintiffs resided. But did hold losing privilege insisting specified defendant thereby acquired York, Indeed, specifically stated 'was 'in defendant."10 10 reasons stated, Highway respondents' codefendant, brought, Code. While, concededly, made itself qualifying part no way waiver privileges conferred them terms sort involved here must resides resides. suit, satisfies neither requirement. Respondents' defeated or, 52, petitioner bringing others one reside. Neither circumstance here. Respondents timely assertion their deemed have objections. As held, co-defendant, brought. follows, therefore, objections well taken, sustaining objections, reached result accord consistently If altered, task undertaken Congress. 11 Affirmed. Act 3, 1887, 24 Stat. 552, corrected August 13, 1888, 25 433, 28 U.S.C. 112, U.S.C.A. 112. R.S. 740, 1101, 113, 113. section entirety follows: 'When contains every local nature, court thereof, single inhabitant he resides; duplicate writ issued directed marshal clerk issuing endorse thereon true copy out proper district; original writs, executed returned into office from they issue, constitute proceeded suit; judgment decree rendered therein, execution issued, State.' Ship-building 1437; Oklahoma Packing Gas & Electric 1940, 309 4, 215, 447. Cir., 1947, 161 F.2d 289. 1946, 443—444, 245, 246, 185; 175, 158, Ex parte Schollenberger, 1878, 96 369, 377, 853. 449, 768. Pacific Denton, 146 202, 205, 13 44, 45, 942; Re Keasbey Mattison 1895, 160 221, 229, 16 273, 275, 40 402; Macon Grocery Atlantic Coast Line R. 1910, 215 501, 509, 30 184, 187, 54 300; Ladew Tennessee Copper 218 357, 367, 31 81, 83, 84, 1069; Male Atchison, Topeka Santa Fe 1916, 240 97, 102, 351, 353, 544; General Investment Lake Shore Michigan 1922, 260 261, 274—279, 43 106, 112—114, 67 244; Seaboard Rice Milling Chicago, Rock Island 1926, 270 363, 366, 46 247, 248, 70 633; Luckett Delpark, Inc., 496, 499, 397, 398, 703; Burnrite Coal Briquette Riggs, 1927, 274 208, 211, 47 578, 71 1002. And see re Hohorst, 1893, 150 653, 662, 14 224, 37 1211; Galveston, Harrisburg San Antonio Gonzales, 1894, 151 503, 504, 506, 401, 403, 404, 405, 38 248. qualifies exception provisions 51. There would basis suggestion attribute 52. See, e.g., Clayton Act, 736, 15 22, 22: 'Any action, proceeding antitrust judicial whereof inhabitant, wherein found transacts business; all cases served wherever found.' 48 29 695. 109, 109; 731, 15, 15; 291, 45 56, 56. 154, 1437.

Category: 8