WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY
v.
ROGERS
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
Béfore the act of Feb. 16,1875 (18 Stat. 316), increasing the sum or valúe-of the 'matter in dispute, necessary to give this court jurisdiction, from $2,000 to $5,000, after May 1,1875, it was held that we had no jurisdiction-in cases where the matter in dispute "was $2,000, and no more, and that in determining the jurisdictional amount “neither interest on the judgment nor costs of suit can enter into the computation.” Walker v. United States, 4 Wall. 164; Knapp v. Banks, 2 How. 73. The act of 1875 simply increases the jurisdictional amount. No other change is made in the old law. The judgment in this case was rendered May 8, 1875, for $5,000 and no more, except costs. It follows that, according to the practice established under the old law, this writ must' be
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 (U.S. 1906)
-
O'Reilly v. Edrington, 96 U.S. 724 (U.S. 1877)
-
Dist. of Columbia v. Gannon, 130 U.S. 227 (U.S. 1889)…Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, the value, of the matter in dispute is determined by the judgment affirmed, without adding interest or costs.” The general rule has been repeatedly so laid down. Western Union Telegraph Company v. Rogers, 93 U. S. 565; Walker v. United States, 4 Wall. 163, 165; Knapp v. Banks, 2 How. 73; New York Elevated Railroad v. Fifth National Bank, 118 U. S. 608. . Where interest, instead of accompanying the judgment, or decree- as damages for the detention of a specific a…
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
- Walker v. United States, 4 Wall. 163 (U.S. 1866)
- Knapp v. Edmund Banks, 2 How. 73 (U.S. 1844)