| SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/83012 |
| Court | US Supreme Court |
| Decided On | 1876 |
| Case Number | 93 U.S. 241 |
| Appellant | Schacker |
| Respondent | Hartford Fire Insurance Company |
Notice (8): Undefined variable: kword [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123]Code Context}//highest occurence of word in the judgementecho $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['judgement']))), $query) . "</div>";$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' )include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123]schacker v. hartford fire insurance company - 93 u.s. 241 (1876) u.s. supreme court schacker v. hartford fire insurance company, 93 u.s. 241 (1876) schacker v. hartford fire insurance company 93 u.s. 241 error to the circuit court of the united states for the northern district of illinois syllabus the doctrine in lee v. watson, 1 wall. 337, that, "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction," affirmed and applied to the present case. .....Code Context}//highest occurence of word in the judgementecho $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['judgement']))), $query) . "</div>";$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' )include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 0include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 1include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
93 U.S. 241
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 2include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 3include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 4include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 5include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Syllabus
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 6include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
The doctrine in Lee v. Watson, 1 Wall. 337, that,
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 7include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
"in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction,"
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 8include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
affirmed and applied to the present case.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 9include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 10include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 11include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 12include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 13include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 14include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
In Lee v. Watson, 1 Wall. 337, we held, that
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 15include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
"In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction."
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 16include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 17include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]Code Contextecho $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect');}echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ', 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a class="page-number" id="242"> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a href="/case/81177/lee-vs-watson"> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ), 'casename_url' => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company', 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Schacker Vs Hartford Fire Insurance Company - Citation 83012 - Court Judgment | ' $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '83012', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => '93 U.S. 241', 'appellant' => 'Schacker', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Schacker Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'US Supreme Court', 'court_type' => 'FN', 'decidedon' => '1876-01-01', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> </p> <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> </p> <p> <b> </b> </p> <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> </p> <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> </p> <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> </p> <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, </p> <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," </p> <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. </p> <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. </p> <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. </p> <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where </p> <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> </p> <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. </p> <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that </p> <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." </p> <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be </p> <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> </p> <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'Hartford Fire Insurance Company', 'sub' => null, 'link' => '/cases/federal/us/93/241/', 'circuit' => null ) ) $casename_url = 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $args = array( (int) 0 => '83012', (int) 1 => 'schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' ) $url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/83012/schacker-vs-hartford-fire-insurance-company' $ctype = '' $date = array( (int) 0 => 'Jan', (int) 1 => '01', (int) 2 => '1876' ) $content = array( (int) 0 => '<html><head></head><body><div> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company - 93 U.S. 241 (1876) <br/> <span> U.S. Supreme Court Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, 93 U.S. 241 (1876) </span> <p> <b> Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company </b> ', (int) 1 => ' <p> <b> 93 U.S. 241 </b> ', (int) 2 => ' <p> <b> </b> ', (int) 3 => ' <p> <em> ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED </em> ', (int) 4 => ' <p> <em> STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS </em> ', (int) 5 => ' <p> <em> </em> <em> Syllabus </em> ', (int) 6 => ' <p> The doctrine in <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, that, ', (int) 7 => ' <p> "in an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this Court can take jurisdiction," ', (int) 8 => ' <p> affirmed and applied to the present case. ', (int) 9 => ' <p> Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court. ', (int) 10 => ' <p> On opening this record, we find that the action below was assumpsit upon a policy of insurance for $1,400. There are two counts in the declaration, but they are both upon the same cause of action, and although the damages, both in the writ and declaration, and laid at $3,000, it is apparent from the whole record that there could not be a recovery in any event for more than $1,400 and interest from July 14, 1873. ', (int) 11 => ' <p> Our jurisdiction, when this writ issued, was limited in cases of this character to those in which the "matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of $2,000." Rev.Stat., sec. 692. Now, in the same class of cases, where ', (int) 12 => ' <p> <a> Page 93 U. S. 242 </a> ', (int) 13 => ' <p> a judgment or decree has been rendered since May 1, 1875, the amount must be $5,000. 18 Stat. 316. ', (int) 14 => ' <p> In <em> <span> <a> Lee v. Watson, </a> </span> </em> 1 Wall. 337, we held, that ', (int) 15 => ' <p> "In an action upon a money demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in the body of the declaration, and not merely the damages alleged or the prayer for judgment at its conclusion must be considered in determining whether this court can take jurisdiction." ', (int) 16 => ' <p> Applying this rule, which is clearly right, to the present case, it is ordered that the writ of error be ', (int) 17 => ' <p> <em> Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. </em> ', (int) 18 => ' <br/> <br/> </div></body></html>' ) $paragraphAfter = (int) 1 $cnt = (int) 19 $i = (int) 18include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109