Hapgood v. Doherty
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action of contract, commenced in the justices’ court for the county of Suffolk, by a writ which contained a direction to attach goods to the value of' $200, and a declaration on an account annexed of $123 for goods sold, and an ad damnum of $100. The defendant pleaded to the jurisdiction of the court, that the claim sought to be recovered exceeded in amount the sum of $100. But judgment was given for the plaintiff for the sum of $100, and the defendant appealed to the…
Read the full summary
Action of contract, commenced in the justices’ court for the county of Suffolk, by a writ which contained a direction to attach goods to the value of' $200, and a declaration on an account annexed of $123 for goods sold, and an ad damnum of $100. The defendant pleaded to the jurisdiction of the court, that the claim sought to be recovered exceeded in amount the sum of $100. But judgment was given for the plaintiff for the sum of $100, and the defendant appealed to the superior court of Suffolk. In that court, the parties agreed that the sum actually due from the defendant to the plaintiff was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
1. Where the original jurisdiction of a court is limited to a claim for a certain amount in money in a case sounding in damages, that amount is to be ascertained by the ad damnum expressed in the writ. The plaintiff cannot recover beyond his ad damwum, and the judgment of the court cannot exceed it. Yet this judgment will be a bar to the whole claim. The case cited from Wheaton does not apply, because it was replevin, which draws in question the right to specific property, and the damage claimed is merely incidental, and no measure of the amount in controversy. The cases from…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Clayton v. ClarkSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1893
- Lamas & Méndez v. BetancourtSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1910