Skip to content


Wells Vs. Wilkins - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number116 U.S. 393
AppellantWells
RespondentWilkins
Excerpt:
wells v. wilkins - 116 u.s. 393 (1886) u.s. supreme court wells v. wilkins, 116 u.s. 393 (1886) wells v. wilkins submitted january 4, 1886 decided january 11, 1886 116 u.s. 393 error to the circuit court of the united states for the northern district of florida syllabus the court receives affidavits from plaintiffs in error, and counteraffidavits from defendants in error, to determine the value of tracts of land sued for in ejectment (neither pleadings nor evidence in the record showing it), and dismisses the case. the facts are stated in the opinion of the court. mr. chief justice waite delivered the opinion of the court. these are suits in ejectment, each for a separate and distinct page 116 u. s. 394 .....
Judgment:
Wells v. Wilkins - 116 U.S. 393 (1886)
U.S. Supreme Court Wells v. Wilkins, 116 U.S. 393 (1886)

Wells v. Wilkins

Submitted January 4, 1886

Decided January 11, 1886

116 U.S. 393

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Syllabus

The court receives affidavits from plaintiffs in error, and counteraffidavits from defendants in error, to determine the value of tracts of land sued for in ejectment (neither pleadings nor evidence in the record showing it), and dismisses the case.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

These are suits in ejectment, each for a separate and distinct

Page 116 U. S. 394

part of a lot in Pensacola. A judgment was rendered in each case for the recovery of the premises sued for in that case. Neither the pleadings nor the evidence found in the records show the value of the property, but on suing out the writs of error, the plaintiffs in error in each case filed two affidavits to the effect that the value was more than $5,000. Since the cases were docketed here, however, the defendant in error has filed counteraffidavits which prove beyond all doubt that this is a mistake, and that the value in every one of the cases in very much less than our jurisdictional limit.

The writs of error are consequently all dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


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