John Smith T. v. Honey

Supreme Court

John Smith T. v. Honey

28 U.S. 469, 7 L. Ed. 744, 3 Pet. 469, 1830 U.S. LEXIS 553

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMarch 22, 1830

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 28 U.S. 469 (John Smith T. v. Honey) 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

John Smith T. v. Honey, 28 U.S. 469, 7 L. Ed. 744, 3 Pet. 469, 1830 U.S. LEXIS 553 (1830).

Pincite

Opinion

Where the verdict for the plaintiff in the circuit court is for a less amount than two thousand dollars, and the defendant prosecutes a writ of error, this court has not jurisdiction; although the demand of the plaintiff in the suit exceeded two thousand dollars.

In the district court of Missouri, John W. Honey instituted an action of trespass on the case for the recovery of damages from John Smith T., the defendant in the action, for the.use of a “ new and useful -improvement in screening tables for discriminating, selecting and separating perfect from imperfect shot,” for which letters patent had been granted to the plaintiff by the United States. The damages were laid in the declaration at two thousand dollars •, and at. September term. 1827 the cause was tried, and a verdict rendered for the plaintiff, for one hundred dollars, upon which judgment was • entered for the plaintiff below.

On.the trial, the counsel for the defendant filed several bills of exceptions to. the opinion of the court, and prosecuted this writ of error.

After the case was opened for the plaintiff in error, the court ordered the writ of error to be dismissed, the same having been sued out-by the defendant in the district court, and the süm in- controversy, as to him, being no more than one hundred dollars, the amount of the verdict in that court. See the casé of Gordon vs. Ogden, at this term; -ante p. 33.

The court overruled the motion.

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

Where the verdict for the plaintiff in the circuit court is for a less amount than two thousand dollars, and the defendant prosecutes a writ of error, this court has not jurisdiction; although the demand of the plaintiff in the suit exceeded two thousand dollars.

In the district court of Missouri, John W. Honey instituted an action of trespass on the case for the recovery of damages from John Smith T., the defendant in the action, for the.use of a “ new and useful -improvement in screening tables for discriminating, selecting and separating perfect from imperfect shot,” for which letters patent had been granted to the plaintiff by the United States. The damages were laid in the declaration at two thousand dollars •, and at. September term. 1827 the cause was tried, and a verdict rendered for the plaintiff, for one hundred dollars, upon which judgment was • entered for the plaintiff below.

On.the trial, the counsel for the defendant filed several bills of exceptions to. the opinion of the court, and prosecuted this writ of error.

After the case was opened for the plaintiff in error, the court ordered the writ of error to be dismissed, the same having been sued out-by the defendant in the district court, and the süm in- controversy, as to him, being no more than one hundred dollars, the amount of the verdict in that court. See the casé of Gordon vs. Ogden, at this term; -ante p. 33.

The court overruled the motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 U.S. 469, 7 L. Ed. 744, 3 Pet. 469, 1830 U.S. LEXIS 553, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-smith-t-v-honey-scotus-1830.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack