Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

8 U.S. 108

Diggs v. Wolcott

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 1, 1807

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1807-02

1 counsel of record

Relies on Watson v. Jones

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1807-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1971 · most notably Toucey v. New York Life Insurance (1941), In re Ayers (1887)

12 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

90180718101820183018401850186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Injunction.

¶2A court of the United States cannot enjoin proceedings in a state court.1

¶3This was an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court for the district of ■Connecticut, in a suit in chancery.

¶4The appellants, Diggs & Keith, had commenced a suit at law against Alexander Wolcott, the appellee, in the county court for the county of Middlesex, in the state of Connecticut, upon two promissory notes given by Wolcott to one Richard Matthews, for the purchase of lands in Virginia, and by him indorsed to the appellants ; whereupon, Wolcott filed a bill in •chancery in the superior court of the state, against the appellants, Diggs & Keith, and also against Robert Young and Richard Matthews, praying that Diggs & Keith might be compelled to give up the two notes to be can-celled, or be perpetually enjoined from proceeding at law for the recovery thereof, &c.

¶5This suit in chancery was removed by the appellants from the state court into the circuit court of the United States for the district of Connecticut, where it was decreed that Diggs & Keith should, on or before a certain day, ■deliver the notes to the clerk of the court, and in default thereof should forfeit and pay to Wolcott $1500 ; and that they should be perpetually en joined, &c.; and that Robert Young should repay to the appellee the amount of principal and interest which the latter had paid on account of the purchase of the lands ; and that the appellee should deliver up to the clerk the •surveys of the lands, and the bond of conveyance; and in default thereof should pay to R. Young the sum of $20,000.

¶6*The case was argued upon its merits by C. Lee and Swann, for the appellants, and by P. C. Key, for the appellee ;

¶8but The Court

¶9being of opinion, that a circuit court of the United States had not jurisdiction to enjoin proceedings in a state court,

¶10Reversed the decree.

/8/us/108 · .json · Public domain