STEVENS V. EICHARPSOK. 191 �in no way affect, but upon which the plaintiff has a specifie lien; and' it was held by the supreme court iu the Union Ba/ak oj Tennessee, 18 How. 503, that "the law of a state, limiting the remedies of its oiti-^ zens in its own courts, cannot prevent the citizens of other. states from suing in the courts of the United States, in that state, for the reoovery of any property or money there to which they may be legally or equitably entitled." Suydam v. Broadnax, 14 Pet. 67; Hyde v. Stone, 20 How. 170.- But it is not necessary now to determine whether this court can, in case of a decree in favor of the plaintiff, proceed to a sale of the real estate described in the deed for its satisfaction. It is enough to say that the bill prays an account, and for a dccree for the amount which may be found due, and for this piurpose it is very clear to us that this court bas jurisdiction, notwithstanding the proceedings in the probate court. Union Bank of Tennegsee, supra; Payne v. Hook, 7 Wall. 425 ; Yonley t. Lavender, 21 Wall. 276. Thia plea must, therefore, also be adjudged insufficient. ���Stevens v. Eichabdson and others. �{Circuit Court, 8. D. New York. October 31, 1881.) �1. Rbmovai oir Causes— Act of 1875, f 2. �Where the plaintiff, in a suit comraenced in a state court, bas united contro; versies between herself and citizens of the same state, with others, which can be fully determined as between the parties to them, between herself and citi- zens of a different state, the latter may have the cause removed under sectioo 2 of the act of 1875. �2. Notice— Same. �No notice prier to the order of reraoval need be given to the other party. �3. Bond — Soketibs. �The bond need not be executed by the petitioners, but is sufflcient if executed by others who are named in it as obligors ; if conditioned that the petitioners shall comply with the provisions of the statute ; and if it recites that the peti- tioners have petitioned for the removal ; thougu the obligors are not otherwise , called in the bond sureties for the petitioners. �4. VOLUNTART APPEARANCB. �A party does not lose the right to insist on the removal of the suit by a vol- untary appearance. �John Berry, for plaintiff. �John E. Burrill, for defendants. �Blatchfoed, C. J. This suit was brought in the supreme court of New York, and bas been removed into this court by the defendants Bichardson and Stevens, as citizens of Massachusetts, the other ��� �
