Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/239/621/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/239/621/case.html
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.
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.
