WABASH, ST. LOUIS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
v.
KNOX
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Company challenged the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear Knox's lawsuit for $5,237.15 in damages. The Court dismissed the writ because the railroad company had formally tendered and the parties had agreed that $727.42 of the judgment was indisputably owed, leaving only approximately $4,510 in actual dispute—an amount below the minimum jurisdictional threshold required at that time. The decision established that when parties stipulate to a portion of a judgment, the Court's jurisdiction is measured by the amount genuinely in controversy rather than the total judgment rendered.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
The judgment in this case was for $5,237.15, but the record shows in many ways that of this amount $727.42 was admitted to be due. A formal tender of that sum was made on the 26th of February, 1883, and the money deposited-in court for Knox, the plaintiff, where it remained until the 14th of March, nine days after the judgment was rendered, when it was withdrawn by the railroad company, without prejudice, on the order of the court and with the consent and agreement of Knox. The bill of exceptions also shows an admitted liability of the company for the amount of the tender. The case is, therefore, in all material respects, like that of Tintsman v. National Bank, 100 U. S. 6, where the writ was dismissed, although the judgment was for $8,233.59, because, by an agreeed statement of facts in the record, it appeared that the defendant admitted he owed $5,099.59 of the amount recovered. To the same effect is Jenness v. Citizens' National Bank of Rome, ante, 52. The amount' in dispute here is no more than was in dispute-below, and that was less than $5,000.
The motion to dismiss is gra/nted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gibson v. Shufeldt, 122 U.S. 27 (U.S. 1887)…e same or other parties. Elgin v. Marshall, 106 U. S. 578; Hilton v. Dickinson, 108 U. S. 165; The Jessie Williamson, Jr., 108 U. S. 305; New Jersey Zinc Co. v. Trotter, 108 U. S. 564; Opelika v. Daniel, 109 U. S. 108; Wabash, &c., Railroad v. Knox, 110 U. S. 304; Bradstreet Co. v. Higgins, 112 U. S. 227; Bruce v. Manchester & Keene Railroad, 117 U. S. 514. The value of property sued for is not always the matter in dispute. In replevin, for instance, if the action is brought as a means of trying the title t…
-
New England Mortg. Sec. Co. v. GAY, 145 U.S. 123 (U.S. 1892)…4 more than the amount recovered. This is the proper method of ascertaining the amount in dispute in this court. Tintsman v. National Bank, 100 U. S. 6; Jenness v. Citizens’ National Bank of Rome, 110 U. S. 52; Wabash, St. Louis &c. Railway v. Knox, 110 U. S. 304; Hilton v. Dickinson, 108 U. S. 165. It is true that, under the Code of Georgia, section 2057, subdivision^, “ all titles to property made as a part of an usurious contract, or to evade the.laws against usury, are void.” The Supreme Court of Georgi…
-
Municipality of Rio Piedras v. Serra, 65 F.2d 691 (1st Cir. 1932)…matively showed that after deducting from the judgment the amount admitted and not in dispute below, there remained less than the jurisdictional sum, the court was without jurisdiction. See to the same effect Wabash, St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Knox, 110 U. S. 304, 3 S. Ct. 638, 28 L. Ed. 155. This court, therefore, is without jurisdiction on the ground of the amount in controversy, although it would undoubtedly have had jurisdiction if the defendant had not admitted in its answer that $1,702.25 of the $6,07…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Tintsman v. Nat'l Bank, 100 U.S. 6 (U.S. 1879)