Bushnell v. Kennedy
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana; the case being thus : The 11th section of the Judiciary Act, a section which defines the original jurisdiction of the Circuit Courts,* enacts: “ That the Circuit Courts shall have original cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the several States, of all suits- of a civil nature at common law or in equity, when the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive of costs, the sum or value of $500, and the United States ai’e…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana; the case being thus : The 11th section of the Judiciary Act, a section which defines the original jurisdiction of the Circuit Courts,* enacts: “ That the Circuit Courts shall have original cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the several States, of all suits- of a civil nature at common law or in equity, when the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive of costs, the sum or value of $500, and the United States ai’e plaintiffs or petitioners, ... or the suit is between a citizen of the State where the suit is brought and a citizen of…
1Opinion of the Court
The CHIEF JUSTICE
delivered the opinion of the court.
That the indebtedness of Bushnell to Mills & Frisby was a chose in action cannot be doubted; for under that comprehensive description are included all debts and all claims for damages for breach of contract, or for torts connected with contract. Nor can it be denied that every suitor who brings an action in a court of the United States must aver in his pleadings a state of facts which, under the National Constitution and laws, gives to the court jurisdiction of his suit. *
In the case before us the suit was brought in the State court, where…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Turner, Administrator of Stanley, in Error v. The President, Directors and Company of the Bank of North AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1799
- US Bank v. PLANTERS'BANKSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Chappedelaine v. DechenauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1808
3Cited by83 opinions
- Goldey v. Morning NewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Claflin v. Commonwealth InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. EstillSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Ingersoll v. CoramSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Wabash Western Railway v. BrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.