Hegler v. Faulkner

Supreme Court

Hegler v. Faulkner

127 U.S. 482, 8 S. Ct. 1203, 32 L. Ed. 210, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2010

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMay 14, 1888

Docket283

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 127 U.S. 482 (Hegler v. Faulkner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hegler v. Faulkner, 127 U.S. 482, 8 S. Ct. 1203, 32 L. Ed. 210, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2010 (1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Miller

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to the. Circuit Court of the United States for the District, of Nebraska.

There is in the record presented here a transcript showing that the action was first brought October 4, .1878, in the District Court of Richardson County, in the State of Nebraska, in which the original pétition or declaration was filed. The suit was to recover the possession of a tract of land situated in that county, containing 320 acres, and for rents and profits alleged to be of ■ the value of $$500. The defendants entered their appearance on May 6, 1879, and leave was granted them to answer in thirty days. The plaintiff was ruled to reply in. fifty days, and the cause continued. An answer was filed May 17, 1879, and this appears to have been done in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska, in which all the subsequent proceedings in the progress of the cause were taken.

Ther,e is no evidence of any petition or order for the removal of the case into this latter court from the state court sitting in the county of Richardson, nqr is there any statement anywhere of the citizenship of the parties. It appears that a trial was thereafter had and a verdict rendered for the defendants. The only attempt made to' show any jurisdiction in the Circuit Court, in which that- trial took place, is a short stipulation between the parties made in that court December 8, 1882, by which it was agreed that the amount in controversy in the action exceeded five thousand dollars.

A judgment in favor of the defendants was entered upon this verdict, to which the present writ of error is directed. It is very clear that this verdict and judgment must be set aside, because the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction of the case.

. The jud-gment of the court helow is reversed, and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice Miller

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to the. Circuit Court of the United States for the District, of Nebraska.

There is in the record presented here a transcript showing that the action was first brought October 4, .1878, in the District Court of Richardson County, in the State of Nebraska, in which the original pétition or declaration was filed. The suit was to recover the possession of a tract of land situated in that county, containing 320 acres, and for rents and profits alleged to be of ■ the value of $$500. The defendants entered their appearance on May 6, 1879, and leave was granted them to answer in thirty days. The plaintiff was ruled to reply in. fifty days, and the cause continued. An answer was filed May 17, 1879, and this appears to have been done in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska, in which all the subsequent proceedings in the progress of the cause were taken.

Ther,e is no evidence of any petition or order for the removal of the case into this latter court from the state court sitting in the county of Richardson, nqr is there any statement anywhere of the citizenship of the parties. It appears that a trial was thereafter had and a verdict rendered for the defendants. The only attempt made to' show any jurisdiction in the Circuit Court, in which that- trial took place, is a short stipulation between the parties made in that court December 8, 1882, by which it was agreed that the amount in controversy in the action exceeded five thousand dollars.

A judgment in favor of the defendants was entered upon this verdict, to which the present writ of error is directed. It is very clear that this verdict and judgment must be set aside, because the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction of the case.

. The jud-gment of the court helow is reversed, and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 U.S. 482, 8 S. Ct. 1203, 32 L. Ed. 210, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hegler-v-faulkner-scotus-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack