Wells v. Wilkins, 116 U.S. 393 (1886)

U.S. Supreme Court

Wells v. Wilkins, 116 U.S. 393 (1886)

Wells v. Wilkins

Submitted January 4, 1886

Decided January 11, 1886

116 U.S. 393

Syllabus

The court receives affidavits from plaintiffs in error, and counteraffidavits from defendants in error, to determine the value of tracts of land sued for in ejectment (neither pleadings nor evidence in the record showing it), and dismisses the case.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

U.S. Supreme Court

Wells v. Wilkins, 116 U.S. 393 (1886)

Wells v. Wilkins

Submitted January 4, 1886

Decided January 11, 1886

116 U.S. 393

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Syllabus

The court receives affidavits from plaintiffs in error, and counteraffidavits from defendants in error, to determine the value of tracts of land sued for in ejectment (neither pleadings nor evidence in the record showing it), and dismisses the case.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

These are suits in ejectment, each for a separate and distinct

Page 116 U. S. 394

part of a lot in Pensacola. A judgment was rendered in each case for the recovery of the premises sued for in that case. Neither the pleadings nor the evidence found in the records show the value of the property, but on suing out the writs of error, the plaintiffs in error in each case filed two affidavits to the effect that the value was more than $5,000. Since the cases were docketed here, however, the defendant in error has filed counteraffidavits which prove beyond all doubt that this is a mistake, and that the value in every one of the cases in very much less than our jurisdictional limit.

The writs of error are consequently all dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.

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.