JOHNSON & Another v. WILKINS

Supreme Court

JOHNSON & Another v. WILKINS

116 U.S. 392, 6 S. Ct. 600, 29 L. Ed. 671, 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1771

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 11, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 116 U.S. 392 (JOHNSON & Another v. WILKINS) 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

JOHNSON & Another v. WILKINS, 116 U.S. 392, 6 S. Ct. 600, 29 L. Ed. 671, 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1771 (1886).

Pincite

Opinion

*393 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.

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

*393 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 U.S. 392, 6 S. Ct. 600, 29 L. Ed. 671, 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-another-v-wilkins-scotus-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack