Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

The D. R. Martin

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1875
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/82825

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
91 U.S. 365
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The D. R. Martin

Excerpt

the d. r. martin - 91 u.s. 365 (1875) u.s. supreme court the d. r. martin, 91 u.s. 365 (1875) the d. r. martin 91 u.s. 365 appeal from the circuit court of the united states for the eastern district of new york syllabus where the libellant recovered in the district court a decree for $600, which, upon appeal by the adverse party, was reversed by the circuit court and the libel dismissed, and the libellant thereupon appealed to this court, held that, the amount in controversy in the circuit court and here being but $600, the appeal must be dismissed. this suit was brought by barney, the libellant, to recover damages for his wrongful eviction from the steamboat d. r. martin. he demanded in his libel $25,000 damages, but in page 91 u. s. 366 the district court recovered only $500. from this decree the claimant appealed. barney did not appeal. the circuit court reversed the decree of the district court and dismissed the libel. from this decree of the circuit court barney appealed to this court. mr. chief justice waite delivered the opinion of the court. barney, having failed to appeal from the decree of the district court, is concluded by the amount found there in his favor. he appears upon the record as satisfied with what was done by that court. in the circuit court, the matter in controversy was his right to recover the sum which had been awarded him as damages. if that court had decided against the claimant, he could not have asked an increase of his damages. stratton v. jarvis, 8 pet. 9, 33 u. s. 10 ; houseman v. schooner north carolina, 15 pet. 40. as the matter in dispute here is that which was in dispute in the circuit court, it follows that the amount in controversy between the parties in the present state of the proceedings is not sufficient to give us jurisdiction. gordon v. ogden, 3 pet. 34; smith v. honey, 3 pet. 469; walker

Full Judgment

The D. R. Martin - 91 U.S. 365 (1875)
U.S. Supreme Court The D. R. Martin, 91 U.S. 365 (1875)

The D. R. Martin

91 U.S. 365

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SYLLABUS

Where the libellant recovered in the district court a decree for $600, which, upon appeal by the adverse party, was reversed by the circuit court and the libel dismissed, and the libellant thereupon appealed to this Court, held that, the amount in controversy in the circuit court and here being but $600, the appeal must be dismissed.

This suit was brought by Barney, the libellant, to recover damages for his wrongful eviction from the steamboat D. R. Martin. He demanded in his libel $25,000 damages, but in

Page 91 U. S. 366

the district court recovered only $500. From this decree the claimant appealed. Barney did not appeal. The circuit court reversed the decree of the district court and dismissed the libel. From this decree of the circuit court Barney appealed to this Court.

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

Barney, having failed to appeal from the decree of the district court, is concluded by the amount found there in his favor. He appears upon the record as satisfied with what was done by that court. In the circuit court, the matter in controversy was his right to recover the sum which had been awarded him as damages. If that court had decided against the claimant, he could not have asked an increase of his damages. Stratton v. Jarvis, 8 Pet. 9, 33 U. S. 10 ; Houseman v. Schooner North Carolina, 15 Pet. 40. As the matter in dispute here is that which was in dispute in the circuit court, it follows that the amount in controversy between the parties in the present state of the proceedings is not sufficient to give us jurisdiction. Gordon v. Ogden, 3 Pet. 34; Smith v. Honey, 3 Pet. 469; Walker v. United States, 4 Wall. 164.

The appeal is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial