UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON-LINE

1. A suit in equity for an injunction to eject state officials from land of which they have taken exclusive possession under claim of right pursuant to a state expropriation statute will not lie in a clubjuris

Page 280 U. S. 501

federal district court, even though the validity of the statute under the federal Constitution be challenged by the bill. The remedy at law is adequate. P. 280 U. S. 510.

2. Section 274a of the Judicial Code (U.S.C. Title 28, § 397) and Equity Rule 22, providing for transfer to the law side of the court of actions at law erroneously begun as suits in equity, refer only to cases of which the Court would have jurisdiction if they were brought on the law side, and if the case be one which, if brought as an action at law, would not be within the jurisdiction of the federal court, then the bill must be dismissed, but without prejudice to an action in a court of competent jurisdiction. P. 280 U. S. 512.

3. In the absence of diversity of citizenship, the federal district court has no jurisdiction of an action in ejectment if the complaint, confined to an orderly statement of the cause of action, without anticipating possible defences, does not present a case arising under the Constitution, or a treaty or law, of the United States. P. 280 U. S. 512.

Reversed.

Appeal from a decree of a district court of three judges granting an interlocutory injunction against the appellants to restrain them from continuing in possession of certain real property. clubjuris

Page 280 U. S. 506