JOHNSON & ANOTHER
v.
WILKINS
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.
Johnson & Another sought to remove an ejectment action from state court to federal court based on the claim that the matter in dispute exceeded $5,000, but the Supreme Court found that the record showed only a dispute over a lot in Pensacola and rent totaling $570, falling below the federal jurisdictional threshold. The Court dismissed the writ of error for want of jurisdiction, holding that the plaintiffs bore the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction through the record or affidavits, which they failed to do.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
There is nothing in this record from which it can fairly be inferred that the value of the matter in dispute exceeds five thousand dollars. The suit was ejectment, begun in a State court and removed to the Circuit. Court of the United States, for a lot in Pensacola and the profits thereof since January 1, 1880, of. the yearly value of five hundred dollars. The value of the lot is not stated in any of the pleadings, but in the petition for the removal of the suit it is put at “ more than five hundred dollars.” The recovery was of the lot and rent at fifteen dollars per month from January 1, 1880, until March 1, 1883, or five hundred and seventy dollars in all. If this rental is to be taken as an indication _of the value of the property, it certainly must be less than our jurisdictional limit. As it rests on the plaintiffs in error to show our jurisdiction either from the record or by affidavits, and this has not been done.
The writ of error is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
De la Torre v. Nat'l City Bank of N.Y., 110 F.2d 381 (1st Cir. 1939)…davits might be received by the appellate court to show the existence of jurisdictional amount in controversy where it did not otherwise appear in the record. Parker v. Morrill, 106 U.S. 1, 2, 1 S.Ct. 14, 27 L.Ed. 72; Wells v. Wilkins, 116 U.S. 393, 6 S.Ct. 600, 29 L.Ed. 671; Wilson v. Blair, 119 U.S. 387, 7 S.Ct. 230, 30 L.Ed. 441; Red River Cattle Co. v. Needham, 137 U.S. 632, 11 S.Ct. 208, 34 L.Ed. 799. In Parker v. Morrill, 106 U.S. 1, 2, 1 S.Ct. 14, 27 L.Ed. 72, it is clearly implied that such affidav…
-
Johnson & Another v. Wilkins, 118 U.S. 228 (U.S. 1886)