GAGE
v.
PUMPELLY AND OTHERS
GAGE
PUMPELLY AND OTHERS
108 U.S. 164
Supreme Court of the United States (1883)
Caution
Also reported at: 27 L. Ed. 668 · 2 S. Ct. 390 · 1883 U.S. LEXIS 1106 · SCDB 1882-170
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
Many of the affidavits sent up with the transcript state distinctly that the value of the, property, which is the matter in-dispute, exceeds $5,000. When an appeal has been allowed, after a contest as to the value of the matter in dispute, and there is evidence in the record which sustains our jurisdiction, the appeal will not be dismissed simply because upon examination of all the affidavits we may be of the opinion that possibly the estimates acted upon below were too high. There is no such decided preponderance of the evidence in this case against jurisdiction as to make it our duty to dismiss the appeal which has been allowed.
Motion denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hunt v. N.Y. Cotton Exch., 205 U.S. 322 (U.S. 1907)…proof was upon the appellant, and he was required to establish by a preponderance of the, evidence that the amount involved was less than the jurisdictional amount. Sheppard v. Graves, 14 How, 504; Wetmore v. Rymer, 169 U. S. 115; Gage v. Pumpelly, 108 U. S. 164; Adams v. Shirk, 117 Fed. Rep. 801. The only evidence offered by him was his contract with the Telegraph Company in connection with evidence of the manner of his receipt and use of the quotations. This testimony was to the effect that the quotations…
-
Wilson v. Blair, 119 U.S. 387 (U.S. 1886)…mally deciding the 'question, of valúe, .allowed a; writ of error, thus sending the [*388] case here on the- affidavits, free from any decision whatever by the court below as to their effect. In this respe'ct the case differs 'from Gage v. Pumpelly, 108 U. S. 164, where the appeal was allowed by the court in session after considering the affidavits; and from Zeigler v. Hopkins, 117 U. S. 683, where .the value was found as one of the facts in the case. • The burden of showing jurisdiction is on the plaintiff…
-
Rector v. Lipscomb, 141 U.S. 557 (U.S. 1891)…ess of five thousand dollars, and therefore dismissed the writ of error. In this case, by a like, showing, the value clearly did not exceed five thousand dollars; and therefore we have no jurisdiction. This is not- like the case of Gage v. Pumpelly, 108 U. S. 164, where the affidavits left the matter doubtful, and therefore we declined to dismiss the appeal which had been allowed by the Circuit Court. Nor is it sufficient answer to this, that the Circuit Court had no power to set aside the order allowing an…