Wabash, St.L. & P. Ry. Co. v. Knox, 110 U.S. 304 (1884)
U.S. Supreme Court
Wabash, St.L. & P. Ry. Co. v. Knox, 110 U.S. 304 (1884)Wabash, St. Louis and Pacific Railway Company v. Knox
Submitted January 14, 1884
Decided January 28, 1884
110 U.S. 304
Syllabus
When the amount in dispute in this Court is less than $5,000 the court cannot take jurisdiction.
Motion to dismiss.
U.S. Supreme Court
Wabash, St.L. & P. Ry. Co. v. Knox, 110 U.S. 304 (1884)Wabash, St. Louis and Pacific Railway Company v. Knox
Submitted January 14, 1884
Decided January 28, 1884
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Syllabus
When the amount in dispute in this Court is less than $5,000 the court cannot take jurisdiction.
Motion to dismiss.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
The judgment in this case was for $5,237.15, but the record shows in many ways that of this amount, $727.42 was admitted to be due. A formal tender of that sum was made on the 26th of February, 1883, and the money deposited in court for Knox, the plaintiff, where it remained until the 14th of March, nine days after the judgment was rendered, when it was withdrawn by the railroad company, without prejudice, on the order of the court, and with the consent and agreement of Knox. The bill of exceptions also shows an admitted liability of the company for the amount of the tender. The case is therefore in all material respects, like that of Tintsman v. National Bank, 100 U. S. 6, where the writ was dismissed, although the judgment
was for $8,233.59, because, by an agreed statement of facts in the record, it appeared that the defendant admitted he owed $5,009.59 of the amount recovered. To the same effect is Jenness v. Citizens' National Bank of Rome, ante, 110 U. S. 52. The amount in dispute here is no more than was in dispute below, and that was less than $5,000.
The motion to dismiss is granted.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.