Case ID: va_79/html/0540-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lewis, P.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Staunton.
    Smith & Wife v. Rosenheim.
    October 7, 1884.
    1. Appellate Court—Jurisdiction.—The test of jurisdiction in this court to entertain an appeal from a decree of the court below enforcing on land the lien of a judgment, is the amount or value of the judgment. If such amount or value fall below $500, this court has no jurisdiction to review such decree.
    2. Idem—Idem—Homestead.—As respects jurisdiction, the case is not altered by the fact that in the progress of the cause in the court below a claim of homestead in the land was asserted by the defendant.
    Opinion states the case.
    
      T. N. Williams, for the appellant.
    
      J. H. Christian, Sheffey & Bumgardner, for the appellees.
   Lewis, P.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The bill was filed to subject the interest of the defendant, Smith, in certain real estate to the satisfaction of a judgment against him in favor of the plaintiff for $130.50, with interest thereon from the 31st day of October, 1878, till paid, and $9.58 costs. The object of the suit was not to recover the land, nor was the title or boundaries of land” in any way involved in the controversy. The case is not altered by the fact that in the progress of the cause a claim of homestead in the land was asserted by the defendant. “ The essence and substance of the decree” complained of, “is the payment of the pecuniary demand asserted, and by that payment the defendant may discharge himself.” Umbarger and Wife v. Watts, 25 Gratt. 167; Fink, Bro. & Co. v. Denny et als., 75 Va. 663; Buckner v. Metz, 77 Va. 107, and cases cited.

The matter in controversy being less in amount than five hundred dollars, the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed.