Martinez v. International Banking Corp.,
220 U.S. 214 (1911)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Martinez v. International Banking Corp., 220 U.S. 214 (1911)

Martinez v. International Banking Corporation

Nos. 79, 80

Argued March 3, 6, 1911

Decided April 3, 1911

220 U.S. 214


The value of the matter in dispute in this Court is the test of jurisdiction. Hilton v. Dickinson, 108 U. S. 165.

Where the only question is the amount of indebtedness, which the security was sold to satisfy, that is the measure of the amount in controversy, and the counterclaim for return of the property sold cannot be added to the amount of the debt to determine the amount in controversy and give this Court jurisdiction. Harten v. Loeffler, 212 U. S. 397, distinguished.

The mere fact that suits are tried together for convenience does not amount to a consolidation, and where the understanding of the trial judge was that there was no consolidation, this Court will not unite the actions so that the aggregate amount will give jurisdiction.

A judgment of the intermediate appellate court reversing and remanding with instructions to enter judgment for plaintiff in accordance with its decision without fixing a definite amount is not such a final judgment as will give jurisdiction to this Court.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 220 U. S. 216

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.