From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. Stoffle

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Dec 3, 1964
339 F.2d 214 (5th Cir. 1964)

Opinion

No. 21472.

December 3, 1964.

Irwin L. Tunis, New Orleans, La., for appellant.

Ralph L. Kaskell, Jr., Deutsch, Kerrigan Stiles, New Orleans, La., for appellees, John F. Tooley, Jr., New Orleans, La., of counsel.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and JONES and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

Of the Second Circuit, sitting by designation.


The appellant brought an action in a federal district court seeking damages for personal injuries and claiming negligence of the appellees. Federal jurisdiction was based on diversity of citizenship. The appellees denied that the requisite diversity of citizenship existed. The court tried the jurisdictional issue and, finding for the appellees, dismissed the action. From the judgment of dismissal this appeal was taken.

The burden of proving jurisdictional facts rests on the plaintiff, whether the issue is raised by motion or answer, or on the court's own initiative. Birmingham Post Co. v. Brown, 5th Cir. 1955, 217 F.2d 127. The district court held that the evidence failed to establish diversity. The finding is not clearly erroneous. The judgment is

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Anderson v. Stoffle

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Dec 3, 1964
339 F.2d 214 (5th Cir. 1964)
Case details for

Anderson v. Stoffle

Case Details

Full title:Jearry D. ANDERSON, Appellant, v. M. Wayne STOFFLE and Milton H. Finger…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Dec 3, 1964

Citations

339 F.2d 214 (5th Cir. 1964)

Citing Cases

Williamson v. Underwriters at Lloyds London

The burden of proving jurisdictional facts rests on the plaintiff. Anderson v. Stoffle, 339 F.2d 214, …

Williams v. Progressive Ins. Co.

The burden of proving jurisdictional facts rests on the plaintiff. Anderson v. Stoffle, 339 F.2d 214,…