Court Opinion

ID: 9454862
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 19:02:27.600031+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:34:21.450616
License: Public Domain

KOELSCH, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
I dissent.
As a tenant by the entireties in fee in the Rapoport real property, Irvin’s interest is of the whole worth at least $25,000 [Walker’s Estate, 340 Pa. 13, 16 A.2d 28, 132 A.L.R. 628 (1940) ; C.I.T. Corp. v. Flint, 333 Pa. 350, 5 A.2d 126, 121 A.L.R. 1022 (1939)]; as a tenant in common his interest is but half with a correspondingly lesser value. Manifestly the difference adequately meets the monetary requirement of the diversity statute.
“And I submit that the suit directly involves the property, for the true nature of the parties’ present interests necessarily hinges upon the outcome. The appeal should be entertained.