121 U.S. 182
7 S.Ct. 1114
30 L.Ed. 885
BURLINGTON, C. R. & N. RY. CO.
DUNN, by another, his Guardian ad Litem.
April 4, 1887.
Charles Dunn, a minor, by his guardian ad litem, sued the Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Company, to recover damages for personal injuries, in the district court for Ramsey county, state of Minnesota. The defendant (plaintiff in error in this court) seasonably filed its petition, affidavit, and bond for the removal of the action to the United States circuit court. The petition alleged that the defendant was a corporation organized under the laws of Iowa, and that plaintiff was, at the time of the commencement of the action, and still was, a citizen of the state of Minnesota. The plaintiff answered by affidavit, denying that he was a citizen of Minnesota, and alleging that he was, at the time his action accrued, and ever since that time had been, and still was, a citizen of the territory of Montana. The allegation of the petition being thus denied, the court refused 'to accept the security offered, and transfer the cause, until proof was made of the citizenship of the plaintiff. The defendant having offered no such proof, the court, against its objection and exception, proceeded to try the cause. On appeal to the supreme court of Minnesota, the judgment of the state district court was affirmed. See 27 N. W. Rep. 448. The defendant thereupon brought this writ.
C. D. O'Brien and Enoch Totten, for the motion.
No brief filed in opposition.
WAITE, C. J.
This case is within the spirit, although not within the letter, of rule 32. The state court refused to let go its jurisdiction on a petition for removal, and the supreme court of the state has affirmed the ruling of the trial court to that effect. The only question for our consideration on the writ of error is whether this decision was right. The case is advanced, to be brought on for hearing in the way provided by rule 32; that is to say, under the rules prescribed by rule 6 in regard to motions to dismiss writs of error or appeals.