Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/664

650 FEDERAL REPORTER, �The answer of the garnishee sliows that she was fully advised as to the nature and character of tKe bond which she borrowed, and ehe must be presumed to have known the provisions of the statuts under which the loan was made. It follows that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment against the garnishee, upon the answer as it stands, for the 8um of $400 and any interest which may appear to be unpaid. �Tbeat, D. J., concurs. ���WooLBiDGE, Assignee, etc., r. McKenna and othera. (Cirewtt Court, W. D. Tennessee. August 22, ISSl.) �1. Bbmovai. of Causes— Time op Filinu Tbanscubpt— Mandatobt and Direct- �OBT Statutes— AcT OF March 3, 1875, § 3—18 St. 470 — Jurisdiction— Ambndments— EeVised Statutes, §5 948, 954. �The provision of the act of March 3, 1875, } 3, requiring the tranacript of the record of the state court to be flled on the first day of the next succeeding term of the federal court, is npt mandatory, as a condition precedent to the jurisdic- tion of the federal court, but is directory only, as a mode of practice. The statute should be strictly obeyed, but the court, under the Revised Statutes, H 948, 954, may, and on good cause shown should, enlarge the time for filing, or cure the defect by allowing the transcript to be filed nunc pro tune. �2. Same Subjbct— Ikfant Dependant- How His Suit may be Rbmoved— Guard- �ian — UuAEDiAN Ad Litbm— Next Frtend— Oitizenship. �Where the neoeSsary jurisdictional facts exist, an infant defendant may remove his suit into the federal court as any other defendant may, and the petition for rcmoval and bond may be flled in his behalf by his regularguardian, the guardian œ(i Utem, or a next friend, as -the case may be. The citizenship of the infant determines the jurisdiction, and not the citizenship of the guardian or next fv;end. �3. Same 8ub„j;ct — Hotv Infant Defendant is Brought in — Service dp Pro- �CBS8 — Substiiutbd Pbooess — Publication — Practice in Removed Causes Where the Dependant is an Infant. �- There is no mode known tb'the- practice of the federal courts in removed' causes Dy which an absent infant defendant can be served with process, or brought into court by substituted process, by publication, or otherwise ; and as an infant cannot voluntarily appear or waive process, nor can an}' one until process served voluntarily appear for him, it is premature for a guardian or next friend to remove the cause until the infant defendant has been, by proper service of process directly, or by substitution, brought into the state court, or until by the state laws some one authorized to enter his appearance has ap- peared for him in that court. He cannot, nor can any one for him, under the authority of the state laws, appear in the federal court, and his representative must defer the removal until the infant has been properly bpund to defend in the state court. Held, therefore, where thefather of an absent infaut defendant appeared in the state court, and, as next friend, flled a petition and bond for a removal before' there had besn any service of process or publication accordini; to the state laws to bring in the infant, that the cause must be remauded for want of jurisdiction over the porson of Ihc infant. ��� �