Stephens

Plaintiff herein seeks to hold the Southern Pacific Company, a nonresident corporation, and one of its resident employees, for an act of negligence alleged to have been committed by the latter. The ease has been removed to this court on the theory that a separable cause of action is stated against the corporation, and at the present time is before me on motion to remand; the plaintiff’s contention being that the negligence charged is joint, and *289 hence that there is not diversity of citizenship.

Whether or not the complaint sets forth a joint or concurrent cause of action, depends on the law of the state of California, where the alleged negligence took place. Chicago, etc., Co. v. McWhirt, 243 U. S. 422, 425 , 37 S. Ct. 392 , 61 L. Ed. 826 ; Robbins v. Pennsylvania Co. (C. C. A. 6) 245 F. 435, 437 , 157 C. C. A. 597 , and cases cited; Rose on Federal Jurisdiction and Procedure (3d Ed.) § 421. As said in Chicago, etc., Co. v. Schwyhart, 227 U. S. 184, 193 , 33 S. Ct. 250, 251 ( 57 L. Ed. 473 ): “The joint liability of the defendants under the declaration * ® * is a matter of state law, and upon that we shall not attempt to go behind the decision of the highest court of the…