About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

John Hagan, Plaintiff in Error v. Thomas J. Foison U.S. 160 (1836)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0099 and id is 1 raw text is: SUPREME COURT. JOHN HAGAN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR V. THOMAS J. Foso, The onis probandi of the amount in controversy, to establish the jurisdiction in a case brought before the court by writ of error, is upon the party seeking to obtain a revision of the case. He i n, prove that the' value exceeds tw3 thousand dollars, exclueive of costs. In this case. the matter in question is the ownership of one negro woman and two children, who are slaves, and it is not supposed their value can be equal to that sum. The writ of error was dismissed. IN error to the district court of the United States, for the southern- district of Alabama. This case was argued by Coxe for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Key for the defendant. After the argument, the court, on inspecting the record, became satisfied that the amount in con- troversy between the parties, was not sufficiett to give the plain- tiff a right to bring the case up by writ of error. Mr. Justice STORY delivered 'he opinion of the court. The court are not satisfied that this case is within their appel- late jurisdiction. To support, that jurisdiction, it is necessary that it should appear, upon the face of the record, or upon affida- vits to be filed by the parties, that the sum or value in contro- versy exceeds $2,000, exclusive of costs. The-onis probandi is upon the party seeking to obtain a revision of the case, to es- tablish. the. jurisdiction. Here -the whole matter in controversy is the ownership of one negro woman and two children, who are slaves; and it is not supposed that their value can be equal to $2,000. The bond in the case, in thd naturc- of a forthcoming hond, in a larger penalty, does not vary the result. But the plaintiff in error is at liberty to establish, if necessaryi that the vaiue exceeds that sum. But there ire other cases on the docket, between the plaintiff in error and other persons, which involved the same points, which have been argued in this case. If any of these cages involved a sum or value which entitles the court to take jurisdiction, we will hereafter give an opinion upon those points.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most