Skip to content


Schultz Vs. Diehl - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number217 U.S. 594
AppellantSchultz
RespondentDiehl
Excerpt:
.....highland gold mines company, a private corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of oregon, against the highland gold mines company, said corporation, and its officers and directors. it is charged in the bill of complaint that the defendant crawford, who was the attorney and legal advisor of the company, conspired with defendants diehl, grabill, and sorrensen, officers and directors of the company, to fabricate false and fictitious claims against the company on which judgment was obtained; that the object and purpose of said defendants was to use the judgment as a means of obtaining title in themselves to the company's property. other fraudulent acts were also charged. upon the trial, defendants diehl and grabill moved to dismiss as to them because the.....
Judgment:
Schultz v. Diehl - 217 U.S. 594 (1910)
U.S. Supreme Court Schultz v. Diehl, 217 U.S. 594 (1910)

Schultz v. Diehl

No. 166

Submitted by appellants April 22, 1910

Decided April 25, 1910

217 U.S. 594

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Syllabus

Under the Act of March 3, 1875, c. 137, 18 Stat. 470, the circuit court may have jurisdiction of an action brought by a resident of one state against a corporation organized under the laws of another state and stockholders of that corporation for the purpose of removing encumbrances from the property of the corporation in the district in which the suit is brought, even if some of the stockholders are not residents of the district in which they are sued. Jellnik v. Huron Copper Mining Co., 177 U. S. 1 .

The plaintiffs and appellants brought this case as minority stockholders of the Highland Gold Mines Company, a private corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Oregon, against the Highland Gold Mines Company, said corporation, and its officers and directors.

It is charged in the bill of complaint that the defendant Crawford, who was the attorney and legal advisor of the company, conspired with defendants Diehl, Grabill, and Sorrensen, officers and directors of the company, to fabricate false and fictitious claims against the company on which judgment was obtained; that the object and purpose of said defendants was to use the judgment as a means of obtaining title in themselves to the company's property.

Other fraudulent acts were also charged.

Upon the trial, defendants Diehl and Grabill moved to dismiss as to them because the court did not have jurisdiction over them for the reason that they had not been sued in the district in which either of them resided or of

Page 217 U. S. 595

which they were residents or inhabitants, it appearing from the bill that they were citizens of Pennsylvania. The court sustained the motion.

PER CURIAM.

Decree reversed with costs and cause remanded to be proceeded in according to law. Jellenik v. Huron Copper Mining Company, 177 U. S. 1 ; 18 Stat. 470, c. 137, § 8; Code of Oregon, §§ 5064, 300, 301.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //