Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 18 Part 1.djvu/189

 Trrnn xm.-rua JUD1IARY.—Ch. 7. 117 to the circuit court that no copy of the record and proceedings therein in the State court can be obtained. the circuit court may allow and require the plaintiff to proceed de novo, and to tile a declaration of his cause of action, and the parties may thereupon proceed as in actions originally brought in said circuit court. On failure of the plaintiff so to proceed. judgment of non prosequitur may be rendered against him, with costs for the defendant. Sec. 644. lVhenever a personal action has been or shall be brought in Removal of Suits any State court by an alien against any citizen of a State who is, or at the ll? ‘jl‘°““ “‘ “Pm" time the alleged action accrued was, a civil officer of the United States, being a non-resident of that State wherein jurisdiction is obtained by the 30 M¤f·» 1872, 6- State court, by personal service of process, such action may be removed 72E,",g_· P·1‘§% into the circuit court of the United States in and for the district in which 137 ,2 vjg pjyfj the defendant shall have been served with the process, in the same man- i i i ner as now provided for the removal of an action brought in a State court by the provisions of the preceding section. Sec. 645. ln any case where a party IS entitled to copies of the record Wh¢¤ 601*66 of and proceedings in any suit or prosecution in a State court, to be used ;°°°$d:;”;°g‘;°£ in any court of the United States, if the clerk of said State court, upon 0g,,:,? 0 demand, and the payment or tender of the legal fees, refuses or neglects  -4-- --·—— to deliver to him certified copies of such records and proceedings, the 572SLj°;‘*41833,;3f," court of the United States in which such record and proceedings are §g`p},jj_, jgjj 0: needed may, on proof by affidavit that the clerk of said State court has 99, s. 17, v. 16,,p. refused or neglected to deliver copies thereof, on demand as aforesaid, 439- direct such record to be supplied by atlidavit, or otherwise, as the circumstances of the case may require and allow; and, thereupon, such proceeding, trial, and judgment may be had in the said court of the United States, and all such processes awarded, as if certified copies of such records and roceedings had been regularl y, before the said court. Sec. 646. IiVhen a suit is removed for trial from a State court to a cir- _ Attachments, incuit court, as provided in the foregoing sections, any attachment of the l1“¤°“P¤S· and 1¤· goods or estate of the defendant by the original process shall hold the rgggyjnbgzgsa? same to answer the final judgment, in the same manner as by the laws mr m,,,0,,,,;_ ' of such State they would have been held to answer final judgment had WSeHQH';€•I it been rendered by the court in which the suit was commenced; and 20, S. 12, v.1,p. 79. any injunction granted before the removal of the cause against the 28g7 J 1%**0% °· defendant a lying for its removal shall continue in force unti modified 2*1,2,, *%,07 ‘c or dissolvedpgy the United States court into which the cause is removed; 196, v. 14; p. 55s. l and any bond of indemnity or other obligation, given by the plaintiff @7 July, 1868, c. ugbn the issuing or granting of ’any attac ment, writ of injunction, or  S- 2· V- 15» P- ot er restraining process, against the defendant petitiomng for the 0'A ,,0 ,800 C removal of the cause, shall also continue in full force and may be prose- 31, sd: v.’14, p. E7: cuted by the defendant and made available for his indemnity in case the 3 Mar., 1863, c. attachment. injunction, or other restraining process be set aside or dis- Sli:-;?'-1%»P·756· solved, or judgment be rendered in his favor, in the same manner, and 80 as 3°‘g’v8?$* Q with the same effect as if such attachment, injunction, or other restrain- 46:’ ’’ ` ing process had been granted. and such bond had been originally filed or 2 5 Feb., 1867, c. given ID such State court. 7h VME: Piggdcr 57, s. 3, v. 4, p. 633. 13 July, 1866, c. 184, s. 67, v. 14, p. 171. 28 Feb., 1871, c. 95, s. 16: v. 16, pp. 438, 439.·——Lamar v. Dana, 10 Blatch., 34Z Sec. 647. If, in any action commenced in a State court, where the title Removalof suits of land is concerned. and the parties are citizens of the same State, and $**9**, 1,;***:1** the matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of @2* ,3;,, gf},; five hundred dollars, the sum or value being made to appear to the sat- ent States. isfaction of the court, either party, before the trial, states to the court, and makes affidavit, if they require it, that he claims and shall rely 20 ,,_12p,,j1 pts; upon a right or title to the land under a grant from a State other than that is Mad., 1875, c. in which the suit is pending, and produces the originatgrant, or an exem- 137, cv. 2, 3, v. 18, p- plification of it, except where the loss of public reco s shall put it out 471- _,, of his power. and moves that the adverse party inform the court whether Town of Pawlet he claims a right or title to the land under a grant from the State in which ¤·-Ol¤rk,9Cr·.292- the suit is pending, the said adverse party shall give such information,