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.
BROWNE AND OTHERS v. STRODE, 1809 — 9 U.S. 303 · caselaw · US
General
BROWNE AND OTHERS v. STRODE
9 U.S. 3035 Cranch 303·Supreme Court of the United States·1809
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
BROWNE AND OTHERS v. STRODE.
The courts of the United. States have jurisdiction in ft case between citizens of the same state, if the plaintiffs áre only nominal plaintiffsfor the use of. an alien.
THIS was a cáse certified from the circuit court for the district of Virginia,. the judges of that court being divided in opinion upon the question whether they had jurisdiction of the case.
It was an action on a bond given by an executor for the faithful execution of his testator’s will, in conformity with the statute of Virginia. . The object of the suit was to recover a debt due from the testator in his life-fime to a British subject. The defendant was a citizen of Virginia. The persons named in the declaration as plaintiffs were the justices of the peace for the county of Stafford, and were all citizens of Virginia.
The question being submitted without argument,
[MAJORITY]
The Court ordered it to be certified, as their opinion, that the court below has jurisdiction in the case.