Myers v. Flewellen
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
WILLSON, O. J.
(after stating the case as above).
The contention that .the suit being, as shown by appellees’ petition, for sums aggregating more than $1,000, the court below was without power to hear and determine it, must be sustained. When jurisdiction depends, as here, upon the “amount in controversy,” such amount is the aggregate of the sums claimed in the petition. Isbell v. Dredging Co., 113 Tex. 528, 261 S. W. 762; Security Co. v. Bank, 93 Tex. 575, 57 S. W. 22; Rust v. Ry. Co., 107 Tex. 385, 180 S. W. 95. The aggregate of the sum claimed in ap-pellees’ petition was $2,300. The county…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Isbell v. Kenyon-Warner Dredging Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1924
- Security Co. v. Panhandle National BankTexas Supreme Court · 1900
- G. W. Rust v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1915
3Cited by2 opinions
- Long v. City of Wichita FallsTexas Supreme Court · 1944
- Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. WheelerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1939