Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/810

 798 FEDBBAL REPORTER. �the controversy was wholly between citizens of different states; that the whole matter in controversy was as to the liability of the petitioner and his co-defendants, Joseph and James Seligman, and that the other defendants were only nominal parties. �Motion was made to remand upon the following grounds, viz. : (1) Because only one of the defendants, Jesse Selig- man, petitioned for the removal, and because the suit was not one in which there could be a final determination of the controversy, as far as concemed him, without the presence of the other defendants ; (2) because the controversy in the suit was partially between parties who are citizens of the state of Missouri, and not wholly between citizens of different states, between whom it could be fully determined ; (3) be- cause the controversy was not wholly as to the liability of said Jesse, James, and Joseph Seligman, but involved ques- tions as to rights of property in which other defendants were interested. �Joseph Shippen and John P. Ellis, for motion. �Broadhead, Slayback e Hauessler, for petitioning de- fendant. �MoCraby, C. J. The corporation defendant is a necessary party to a bill to enforce a judgment against it by compell- ing contribution from its stockholders. AU the stockholders are likewise necessary parties, if they apply to be heard, to the end that each may be assessed his equitable share only. Hence it is that in this case the controversy is not wholly between citizens of different states, and cannot be finally de- termined as between them. �Motion to remand sustained. ��� �