Home/D.C. Circuit/Rowe v. Nolan Finance Co.

Rowe v. Nolan Finance Co.

142 F.2d 93, 79 U.S. App. D.C. 35, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3262
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedApril 10, 1944
DocketNo. 8573
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 142 F.2d 93 (Rowe v. Nolan Finance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rowe v. Nolan Finance Co., 142 F.2d 93, 79 U.S. App. D.C. 35, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3262 (D.C. Cir. 1944).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed a complaint in the District Court in which she alleged that she had borrowed $262.80 from appellees on a note and had given a deed of trust on an automobile as security; that this transaction was fraudulent and usurious; and that appellees seized the car upon appellant’s default in a payment on the note. Appellant demanded damages in an aggregate amount of $2,000, an order that appellees disclose the state of the account between the parties, and an injunction against sale of the car. The court rightly dismissed the complaint on the ground that the amount in controversy was not sufficient to give the court jurisdiction. Suits “in which the claimed value of personal property or the debt or damages claimed” does not exceed $3,000 are now in the exclusive jurisdiction of the Municipal Court for the District of Columbia. D.C.Code 1940, Supp. II, § 11-755, 56 Stat. 192, ch. 207, § 4; Klepinger v. Rhodes, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 340, 140 F.2d 697.

Though the court dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, it undertook to make findings upon the merits. These findings are without effect. Dismissal is without prejudice to the enforcement in the Municipal Court of any claim which appellant may have.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Ron Burleson v. Coastal Recreation, Inc., Defendant-Third Party v. Inland Sailboats, Incorporated, Third Party Defendant-Fourth Partyplaintiff-Appellee v. Dutton Lainson Company, Fourth Party
595 F.2d 332 (Third Circuit, 1979)
Burleson v. Coastal Recreation, Inc.
595 F.2d 332 (Fifth Circuit, 1978)
Gerald B. Lefcourt, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. The Legal Aid Society
445 F.2d 1150 (Second Circuit, 1971)
Brown v. Greenwich Lounge, Incorporated
225 A.2d 656 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1967)
Blumenthal v. Blumenthal
155 A.2d 525 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1959)
Sheherazade, Inc. v. Mardikian
143 A.2d 512 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1958)
Eatmon v. Driggers
125 A.2d 847 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1956)
Al Friedman v. International Association of MacHinists
220 F.2d 808 (D.C. Circuit, 1955)
Wright v. Armwood
107 A.2d 702 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1954)
Shulman v. Shulman
86 A.2d 527 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1952)
Robinson v. Carter
77 A.2d 174 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1950)
Thomas v. Marvins Credit, Inc.
76 A.2d 773 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1950)
Boyle v. Smith
64 A.2d 428 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1949)
Levy v. Arsenault
62 A.2d 642 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1948)
Suydam v. Ameli
46 A.2d 763 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1946)
Ridgley v. United States
45 A.2d 475 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 F.2d 93, 79 U.S. App. D.C. 35, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowe-v-nolan-finance-co-cadc-1944.