Case ID: ky_101/html/0269-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "JUDGE WHITE", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Case 45 —PETITION
    May 8.
    American Accident Company v. Slaughter.
    APPEAL FROM CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT.
    1. Appeals — Jurisdiction—Amount in Controversy. — The .amount in controversy when the defendant appeals, is the amount of the judgment against him, and not the amount sued for by the plaintiff.
    '2. Appeals — Damages on Dismissal.- — Where in this court an appeal is dismissed for the want of jurisdiction, if the judgment is for money and has been superseded, the appellee is entitled to the damages provided for by section 764, of the Civil Code.
    PHELPS & THÜM for appellant.
    1. The chief office or place of business of the appellant was in Louisville, and under. section 71, of the Civil Code, actions against an insurance company, with certain exceptions not applicable to this case, may only he brought in the county within which its principal office or place of business is situated; at any rate the agent Duncan upon whom the process was served was not the “chief agent” of the appellant within the meaning of section 723, of the Civil Code.
    2. Under the express provisions of the contract no suit was to be brought after the expiration of four months from the termination of the disability, and the petition shows on its face that it was not brought within that period, and the demurrer should have been sustained. Kenton- Ins. Co. v. Downs, 90 Ky., 230; Howard v. Kentucky Mutual Ins. Co., 13 B. M., 282.
    R. W. MASTERSON of counsel on same side.
    GAUNT & DOWNS for appellee.
    1. The transaction out of which the suit grew arose with an agent „ of the company in Carroll county, and under the provisions of section 71, of the Civil Code, that gave the circuit court of that county jurisdiction over the action. Kentucky Mutual Se-1 curity Fund Co. v. Logan’s Adm’r., 90 Ky., 366.
    2. The amount of the judgment against the party appealing is the amount in controversy, and in this case the judgment against appellant is for less than one hundred dollars, and this-court has no jurisdiction of the appeal. Ky. Stat., sec. 950.
   JUDGE WHITE

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Carroll county rendered in favor of the appellee against- the appellant for the sum of $96. Section .950, Kentucky Statutes, provides that “no appeal shall be taken to the Court of Appeals from a judgment for the recovery of money or per* sonal property if the value in controversy be less than $100, exclusive of interest and cost.”

The amount in controversy when the defendant appeals is the amount of the judgment against him, not the amount sued for (L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Wade, 89 Ky., 265.) The amount in controversy in this appeal being less than $100, this court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the same. By section 887, Kentucky Statutes, it is provided, among other things, “the party in error, if an action be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, shall pay the cost.” It appears from this record that the appellant superseded the judgment appealed from. Section 764, Civil Code of Practice, provides: “Upon the affirmance of or dismissal of an appeal from a judgment for the payment of money, the collection of which in whole or part has been superseded as provided in chapter 2 of this title, ten per cent, damages on the amount superseded shall be awarded against the -appellant.”

.Because this court has no jurisdiction of this appeal the same is dismissed, with damages. .