ARGUED AND DETERMINED
ur mm
h itvd 5i its (F5' v 't :1 iztttti QI? tz
II H it lll Hi! I UM .
Snow and others v. Tmxss Tatmx Bama0m.'
M (Circuit Court, M 1). Tora:. December, 1882.l
Rmmovn. or Closes. J V
ln a suit pending in a state court of Texas between parties who were all
citizens of that state, certain citizens of other states holding liens which en-
titled them, under thelaws of Texas, to intervene, applied for leave to intervene
and litigate their rights, which was refused by the state court. The next day, _
without leave, they filed their petition asserting their claims, and contesting
the lien and alleged priority of the plaintiffs in the suit, and then removed the
suit to this court. On a motion to remand, held, that an order oi the state
court was not necessary in order to make them parties to the suit, and it was
properly removed.
On Motion to Remand to the State Court. V
Saronie, Robertson c6 Adams, for the motion.
White rf Plowmnn, contra.
Pannnn, J. The motion to remand this case to the state court
from which it was removed here is based on these grounds: (1) That _
the persons who filed the petition and bond for removal were not
parties to the suit, because they were not necessary parties, and were
not made parties, and their petition to intervene had been rejected
and denied by the court; (2) that the application to remove was not
made before or at the term at which the cause could be first tried; .
*Reported by Joseph P. Hornor, Esq,, of the New Orleans bar.
v.16,no.1—1