Legal Opinion

Davis v. Kansas City, S. & M. R. Co.

United States Circuit Court

Decided December 14, 1887PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.

The motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction is based on the fact that the ad damnum in the writ and declaration is loss than $2,000, the amount fixed as the minimum limit of our jurisdiction by the act of March 3, 1887, c. 373, (24 St. 552,) the suit having been commenced a few days after that act was passed, evidently in ignorance of the changes made by it. The plaintiff moves to amend the writ and declaration by increasing the ad damnum to $2,600, but this motion the defendant resists, on the ground that it is manifestly made to give the court a fictitious jurisdiction.

By the Revised…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hartog v. MemorySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Lee v. WatsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
  3. Bowman v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
  4. Elting v. CampbellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1863

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Thompson v. Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1949
  2. Manitowoc Malting Co. v. FuechtwangerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1909
  3. Kent v. Bay State Gas Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Delaware · 1899
  4. Silverman v. Central Amusement Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API