Court Opinion

ID: 8311571
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 15:49:49.729953+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:44:44.947397
License: Public Domain

TANEY, Circuit Justice.
The amendment cannot be made. If the court had jurisdiction of the case, that is, if enough appeared in the record to show that the circuit court had a right to review the decision of the district court in this case, there is no doubt the court would have the power to allow any amendment necessary to bring the justice of the case fairly and fully to trial. But this court has no authority, by law, to review the decree of the district court, unless the matter in controversy amounts to $50; the record does not show that it amounts to this sum; and the object of the amendment is to change the record, in order to give the court jurisdiction in a case where, according to the record before them, they have not jurisdiction; the court think this cannot be done. If the case showed that the appeal was legally in this court, then having jurisdiction over it, the court could permit the pleadings to be so amended, as to enable the court to do justice between the parties; but we cannot acquire jurisdiction by altering the record which has come to us from the district court
Mr. Williams then suggested that one of the witnesses whose deposition was contained in the record, stated that he saw the assault and battery, and that he would not have run the risk of the blow given to the libellant for $100.
TANEY, Circuit Justice.
The deposition of the witness does not show the amount of damages claimed by the libellant, and it is the claim of the libellant, and the answer of the respondent denying the claim, that make the controversy, and ascertain the amount in dispute. Where property is in dispute, and the value of it is not averred, and does not appear in the record, parol testimony has been received in the supreme court, upon appeal, to show its value, and to show the jurisdiction of the court; and so too, as to the value of an office, where the right to the office is the matter in controversy. But where the controversy relates merely to the amount of money which one party is entitled to recover from the other, the record must show the amount in dispute, in order to give jurisdiction to the appellate court; and the amount in dispute is shown by the claim made by one, and the denial made by the other. The damages might in fact have amounted to $100, and yet, if the libellant claimed but $10, as his damages, $10 would be all that was in controversy.
The circuit court dismissed the appeal, for want of jurisdiction, without costs; saying, that in all cases in the supreme court, where the appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction, the court gave no costs, and as that was the rule in the supreme court, it was proper that the circuit court should adopt the same rule in analogous cases.