Case Name: Robert Hall et al. vs. Mrs. H. M. Curtis
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1887-04
Citations: 39 La. Ann. 504
Docket Number: No. 9957
Parties: Robert Hall et al. vs. Mrs. H. M. Curtis.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 39
Pages: 504–505

Head Matter:
No. 9957.
Robert Hall et al. vs. Mrs. H. M. Curtis.
Tn an action to recover property real and personal -with rents and revenues, and damages for injury and waste, the whole amounting to only $1710, the addition of a roving claim for $500 additional damages for illegal possession, without any specification of the nature thereof, will he treated as fictitious and not entitled to consideration as part of the amount in dispute giving this Court jurisdiction.
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. RigMor, J.
J. S. & J. T. Whitaker for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
M. If. Skmner for Defendant and Appellee.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Fenner, J.
A motion is made to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction thereof, because the amount in dispute does not exceed two thousand dollars.
We think the appeal has no place in our Court.
The action is to recover :
1st. Two lots of ground valued at..........................$1,000
2d. Rents and revenues thereof, valued at.................. 260
3d. Certain personal property or its value, yalued at........ 300
4th. Injury and waste of improvements, valued at........... 150
the whole amounting to......................................$1,710
To this is added a roving allegation that " by said fraudulent and illegal possession of said property petitioners have been damaged in the full sum of five hundred dollars."
Inasmuch as this allegation is supported by no specification of the nature of the pretended damage, and as every reasonable cause of in jury had been set forth in the previous particular claims, we must treat this last claim as merely fictitious and entitled to no consideration as forming part of the real matter in dispute, which is thus below the limit of our jurisdiction.
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.