WOLFE v. HARTFORD LIFE & ANNUITY INS. CO.

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

WOLFE v. HARTFORD LIFE & ANNUITY INS. CO., (1893)

No. 162

Argued:     Decided: March 27, 1893

Robert S. Green, for plaintiff in error.

Herman Kobbe, for defendant in error.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE.

The complaint in this case avers that the plaintiff was at the several times mentioned therein, 'and ever since has been, and still is, a resident of the city, county, and state of New York,' but his citizenship is nowhere disclosed by the record.

It is essential, in cases where the jurisdiction depends upon the citizenship of the parties, that such citizenship, or the facts which in legal intendment constitute it, should be distinctly and positively averred in the pleadings, or should appear with equal distinctness in other parts of the record. It is not sufficient that jurisdiction may be inferred argumentatively from the averments. Brown v. Keene, 8 Pet. 112, 115; Insurance Co. v. Rhoads, 119 U.S. 237 , 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 193; Menard v. Goggan, 121 U.S. 253 , 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 873.

Judgment reversed, at the costs of plaintiff in error, and the cause remanded for further proceedings.[ Wolfe v. Hartford Life & Annuity Ins. Co. 148 U.S. 389 (1893) ]

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More