Legal Opinion

Lámar v. Micou

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided December 19, 1881PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Motion to dismiss an appeal from the Circuit Court of th® United States for the Southern District of New York.

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Waite

This is an appeal by the defendant below from a decree against him for less than $5,000. There is no claim of set-off or counter-claim, except to reduce the amount of the recovery. In no event can he get any money decree in his favor. All he seeks to do is to defeat the claim of the appellee. Consequently the amount in controversy, so far as this appeal is concerned, is fixed by the decree. Thompson v. Butler, 95 U. S. 694; Sampson v. Welsh, 24 How. 207. In effect he insists that, under the rule of liability established against him in. the court below, the decree should have been for more…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. ButlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Sampson v. WelshSupreme Court of the United States · 1861

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Lámar v. MicouSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Hilton v. DickinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  3. Delaware, L. & W. R. v. PetrowskyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918
  4. Young v. MargiottaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
  5. American United Life Ins. v. FranklinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API