Rogers v. Hennepin County
239 U.S. 621 (1916)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Rogers v. Hennepin County, 239 U.S. 621 (1916)

Rogers v. Hennepin County

No. 411

Argued December 6, 1915

Decided January 17, 1916

239 U.S. 621

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Syllabus

In an action brought by a number of complainants to restrain the collection of a tax separately assessed against each for under forty dollars, the aggregate exceeding the jurisdictional amount, held that the district court did not have jurisdiction, as the amount as to each complainant was the sum charged against him, and demands against all could not be aggregated in order to confer jurisdiction. Wheless v. St. Louis,180 U. S. 379.

The facts, which involve the method of determining the amount in controversy in order to give jurisdiction to the district court, are stated in the opinion.

MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Three complainants, claiming to represent themselves and others like situated (numbering altogether 550), instituted this proceeding in equity against Hennepin county, Minnesota, and certain of its officers, in the district court of the United States, seeking an injunction to prevent collection of a tax under $40 assessed against each of them, for the year 1913, on account of his membership in the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce.

Page 239 U. S. 622

Defendants challenged the court's power to entertain the cause upon the ground that the amount in controversy as to each complainant is the sum charged against him, and demands against all cannot be aggregated in order to confer jurisdiction. The district court sustained this objection upon authority of Wheless v. St. Louis,180 U. S. 379, and dismissed the bill. It committed no error in so doing, and its judgment is

Affirmed.

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.