Strawbridge v. Curtiss

U.S.

Court: Supreme Court of the United States

Citations: 3 Cranch 267, 7 U.S. 267, 2 L. Ed. 435, SCDB 1806-005, 1806 U.S. LEXIS 331

Decision Date: 1806-02

Jurisdiction: U.S.

Bluebook Citation: Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 3 Cranch 267, 7 U.S. 267, 2 L. Ed. 435, SCDB 1806-005, 1806 U.S. LEXIS 331 (U.S. 1806)

More Cases: U.S. decisions from 1806


Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Landmark AuthorityTop 1% most-cited · cited by 1,601 decisions
1,601
Citing decisions
6+
Courts citing

Citations by decade

3
1
4
5
4
11
5
6
13
7
6
11
23
29
44
83
187
251
235
170
503
1820s1830s1840s1850s1860s1870s1880s1890s1900s1910s1920s1930s1940s1950s1960s1970s1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

C.D. Cal.122
S.D.N.Y.102
D.N.J.77
5th Cir.66
7th Cir.50
E.D. Pa.50
Most recently cited by10
  • 2026Julie Schulz Halbower v. Hiscox Syndicate 33 of Lloyd's of London 6th Cir.
  • 2026Vivy Voutsiotis v. PNC Bank, NA 6th Cir.
  • 2026Carlino v. Muji U.S.A. Limited
  • 2026Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist SCOTUS
  • 2026MOORE M.D.N.C.
  • 2026Robey D. Ariz.
  • 2026EMG Transfer Agent, LLC v. Acadian Place 2022 Holbox LLC M.D. La.
  • 2026Wrenn W.D. Okla.
  • 2026Dick S.D. Ill.
  • 2026Gross W.D. Tenn.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Opinion

*Strawbridge et al. v. Curtiss et al.

Attorneys

  • The question of jurisdiction was submitted to the court, without argument, by JP. B. Key, for the appellants, and Harper, for the appellees.
majority Marshall, Ch. J.,

Delivered the opinion of the court. — The court has considered this case, and is of opinion, that the jurisdiction cannot be supported.

The words of the act of congress are, “ where an alien is a party, or the ■suit is between a citizen of a state where the suit is brought, and a citizen of another state.” The court understands these expressions to mean, that each distinct interest should be represented by persons, all of whom are entitled to sue, or may be sued, in the federal courts. That is, that where the interest is joint, each of the persons concerned in that interest must be competent to sue, or liable to be sued, in those courts.

But the court does not mean to give an opinion in the case where several parties represent several distinct interests, *and some of those parties r,... are, and others are not, competent to sue, or liable to be sued, in the *- •courts of the United States.

Decree affirmed.

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.