Hess v. Reynolds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hess v. Reynolds

Decided January 5, 1885

Full case name:	Hess v. Reynolds

Citations:	113 U.S. 73

Holding

Court membership

Chief Justice: Morrison Waite
Associate Justices: Samuel Freeman Miller, Stephen Johnson Field, Joseph Philo Bradley, John Marshall Harlan, William Burnham Woods, Thomas Stanley Matthews, Horace Gray, Samuel Blatchford

Case opinions

Hess v. Reynolds, 113 U.S. 73 (1885), was a writ of error on the judgment of the Eastern district of Michigan circuit court remanding a cause to the state court.^[1]

The plaintiff, a citizen of Missouri, prosecuted his claim in the probate court of Ionia county, Michigan, against the estate of Warren Sherwood, deceased, of which William Reynolds had been appointed administrator. The claim was resisted, and was referred to commissioners appointed by the probate judge, who reported against its allowance. The issue was appealed to the circuit court of Ionia county for a trial by jury and was moved to the circuit court of Jackson county after several years delay that the plaintiff believed that due to prejudice and local influence, he would not be able to obtain justice in the state court.

It was argued that the cause should have been moved to the circuit court for the Western district of Michigan instead of the Eastern, because the county of Ionia, in which the suit originated, is in the former.

But the language of the removal statute is that suits shall be removed into the circuit court of the district where such suits are pending. Undoubtedly this means where they are pending at the time of removal. This suit was not then pending in the Western district of Michigan, but in the county of Jackson, which is in the Eastern district of that state. The court’s opinion was that the case was properly removed from the circuit court of Jackson county into the circuit court of the United States for the Eastern district of Michigan, and that that court erred in remanding it. The judgment was reversed, with instructions to proceed in the case according to law.