Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Contracts · MBE-tested
Kimball v. Evans
93 U.S. 32023 L. Ed. 920·Supreme Court of the United States·1876
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Kimball v. Evans.
Where a petition for the removal of a suit filed under the act of March 2,1867 (14 Stat. 558), was, in accordance witli the practice of the State, reserved for the decision of the Supreme Court, and the latter dismissed the petition, and remanded the cause to the inferior court for further proceedings, according to law, — Held, that this court has no jurisdiction.
Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio.
Pending á suit in the District Court of Stark County, Ohio, a petition was filed, under the act of March 2,1867 (14 Stat. 558), for its removal to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District in that State. This petition presenting for consideration, in the opinion of the District Court, difficult and important questions, the cause was reserved, in accordance with the practice in Ohio, to the Supreme Court “ for its decision on said petition for the removal of ¿he cause to the Circuit Court.” The Supreme Court, after hearing, dismissed the petition and remanded the cause to the District Court “ for further proceedings according to law.”
To reverse this judgment the present writ of error was brought.
Submitted on printed arguments by Mr. H. E. Paine for the defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Chief Justice Waite]
Mr. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.
It is clear we have no jurisdiction in this cause. The judgment of the Supreme Court is not the final judgment in the suit. It disposed finally of one of the questions involved in the suit, but not of the suit itself. The suit is still pending in the District Court, and it is not impossible that the parties now complaining may be satisfied with the judgment which they may in the end be able to secure in the State courts. If not, after a final judgment has in fact been rendered by the highest court of the State in which a decision in the suit can be had, the case may be again brought here for a determination of the questions arising upon the petition for removal. But in the present condition of the record the writ must be
Dismissed.