Legal Opinion

Starns v. Success Portrait Co.

District Court, E.D. Tennessee

Decided December 4, 1940No. Civ. No. 52PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DARR, District Judge.

The defendant has submitted a motion seeking a dismissal of the suit on the grounds that the amount actually in controversy is less that $3,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

This motion is an appropriate manner to challenge the allegations of jurisdictional facts. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 12(b) (1), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.

The jurisdictional facts being challenged in an appropriate manner, the plaintiff must support them by competent proof. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation, 298 U.S. 178, 186, 56 S.Ct. 780, 80 L.Ed. 1135; KVOS v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. KVOS, Inc. v. Associated PressSupreme Court of the United States · 1936

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Strong v. RG Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1988
  2. Over 30 Ass'n v. BlattDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API