Skip to content


Hunt Vs. Bender - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number154 U.S. 556
AppellantHunt
RespondentBender
Excerpt:
hunt v. bender - 154 u.s. 556 (1868) u.s. supreme court hunt v. bender, 154 u.s. 556 (1868) hunt v. bender no. 103 submitted march 13, 1868 decided march 30, 1868 154 u.s. 556 appeal from the supreme court of the territory of nebraska syllabus several judgments severally held by different complainants who unite in the prosecution of a creditor's bill cannot be added together to make the amount necessary to give this court appellate jurisdiction. the case is stated in the opinion. chief justice chase delivered the opinion of the court. the object of the writ in the territorial court was to subject certain property to the satisfaction of certain judgments. the bill of the complainants, now appellants, was.....
Judgment:
Hunt v. Bender - 154 U.S. 556 (1868)
U.S. Supreme Court Hunt v. Bender, 154 U.S. 556 (1868)

Hunt v. Bender

No. 103

Submitted March 13, 1868

Decided March 30, 1868

154 U.S. 556

APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE TERRITORY OF NEBRASKA

Syllabus

Several judgments severally held by different complainants who unite in the prosecution of a creditor's bill cannot be added together to make the amount necessary to give this Court appellate jurisdiction.

The case is stated in the opinion.

CHIEF JUSTICE CHASE delivered the opinion of the Court.

The object of the writ in the territorial court was to subject certain property to the satisfaction of certain judgments. The bill of the complainants, now appellants, was dismissed, and they now prosecute this appeal for the reversal of that decree.

The judgments set up by the complainants were several, and neither of them was for an amount exceeding two thousand dollars, and it was decided at the last term in the case of Seaver v. Bigelows, 5 Wall. 208, that several judgments severally held by different complainants who unite in the prosecution of a creditors' bill cannot be added together in order to snake the amount exceeding two thousand dollars which is necessary in order to enable the Court to take appellate jurisdiction.

The appeal must therefore be

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //