Legal Opinion

McLaughlin v. Darlington

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided June 16, 1897No. 216PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error from Clay District Court. Hon. R. B. Spilman, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtMahan, P. J.

Upon the call of this case for hearing upon its merits, the defendant in error presented a motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, because it does not affirmatively appear that the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of one hundred dollars, and the certificate of the trial court does not show that this is one of the excepted cases. It does appear, and it is admitted, that the case is, in fact, one within the exception of the statute. Upon an examination of the record, we are of the opinion that it does appear from the record, by reasonable •intendment, that the property in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Jones v. Charles P. Kellogg & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1893
  2. Red River Cattle Co. v. NeedhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. Heaton v. Norton County State BankCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1897
  4. Williamson v. KincaidSupreme Court of the United States · 1800
  5. John Hagan, in Error v. Thomas J. FoisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1836

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Paetz v. McKayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API