Springstead v. Crawfordsville State BankAnnotate this Case
231 U.S. 541 (1913)
U.S. Supreme Court
Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541 (1913)
Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank
Submitted December 4, 1913
Decided December 22, 1913
231 U.S. 541
In determining the amount in controversy for jurisdictional purpose the attorney's fee provided for in a promissory note in case of suit can be considered, as it is not a part of the costs.
Failure to allege the citizenship of the original payee of a note on which suit is brought by the assignee is a jurisdictional defect, but if diversity of citizenship between the plaintiff and defendant is alleged, the defect is amendable.
Under § 299 of the Judicial Code, amendments to the pleadings are allowable if the jurisdictional amount existed when the suit was brought notwithstanding that since then the amount necessary to give jurisdiction has been increased.
The facts, which involve the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, are stated in the opinion.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.