VTAIiEKB V.. FIjINT. ^S5 �Walkee V. VhTST and ottiers. [Giretiit Court, E. D. Missowi. January 3, 1881.) �1. Pbacticb — JuKisDicTioN— Motion to Dismiss. �A Jurisdictlonal question cannot be raised by a motion to dismiss, except where the want of jurisdiction appears on the face of the record. �2. SaMK — Pl.BA vs Abatbmbnt. �Where facts not of record have to be shown, the question should be brought before the court by a plea in abatement. �3. Jdkisdiction — Inteefekence Between State and Fbdbbal �Courts. �State and federal courts cannot lawfully interfere with each other where each is acting within legal limits. �4. Same— CusTODT op Pboperty, �A federal court will neither interfere with property in the lawful custedy of a state court, nor tolerate interference by a state court with property in its custody. �6. Samb— Pbopbhty not Lawfult.t m Custodt op Statb Court. �An Insurance company built a kouse partially On its own land and partially upon that of A., without A. 's consent, and leased it to B. & C. Thereafter the company was dissol ved by a decree of the state court having jurisdiction, and all its property vested in D., the state super- intendent of Insurance. B. & C. then attorned to D. A. and B., C, and D. were citizens of different states. After the attornment to D., A. brought suit against B., C, and D., in the federal court, to recover possession of the property of which he had been dispossessed. Hdd, that the federal court was not ousted of its jurisdiction by the attorn- ment of B. & C. to D. �Ejectment. Motion to dismiss. �Sansum d Jones, for plaintiff. �Carr d Reynolds, for defendants. �Tbbat, d. J. TMs is an action of ejectment, in •whioh the plaintiff bas set ont with great particularity his deraignment of title, through proceedings in partition, to which the Life Association of America became a party. The final decree in said partition suit allotted to the plaintiff the premises in dis- pute. Said decree was entered in June, 1877, and duly recorded. �In July, 1878, the Life Association of America destroyed the fence previously erected by plaintiff along the division line of the lots assigned to him by the decree in partition ��� �
