Case ID: sw2d_4/html/0193-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PANNILL, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

FATH et al. v. NEWMAN.
    (No. 321.)
    Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.
    June 3, 1927.
    Courts ⅞=>120 — District court held without jurisdiction of case involving possession of personal property described as of exactly $500 value (Const, art. 5, § 16).
    Under Const, art. 5, § 16, requiring that amount in controversy must exceed $500 in order to confer jurisdiction on district court, such court was without jurisdiction in case involving title and possession of personal property described in petition and in affidavit for sequestration as of the value of exactly $500.
    Appeal from District Court, Dallas County ; Louis Wilson, Judge.
    Action by C. F. Fath and others against Alice Newman. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal.
    Appeal dismissed.
    White & Yarborough, of Dallas, for appellants.
    Jeff D. Stinson, of Dallas, for appellee.
   PANNILL, C. J.

Appellants sued appellee in the district court of Dallas county for the title and possession of certain personal property described in their petition of the total value of exactly $500. Ancillary thereto they caused a writ of sequestration to issue, by virtue of which the sheriff took the property in possession. The affidavit for sequestration alleged the value of the property to be exactly $500. Defendant replevied the property. Upon a trial of the cause judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant, from which an appeal has been taken.

The appeal is dismissed. The district court was without .jurisdiction to hear and determine the cause. In order to confer jurisdiction upon the district court the amount in controversy must exceed $500. Constitution, art. 5, § 16.

No further citation of authorities is necessary.

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.