Shacklett v. Western Lunatic Asylum

Appellate Jurisdiction—Minimum.—Where amount involved is less than the jurisdictional minimum of $500, and no constitutional question is in the case, the writ of erroT must be dismissed.

Error to judgment of the hustings court of city of Staunton, rendered July 10th, 1889, in a proceeding by notice, wherein the Western Lunatic Asylum was plaintiff, and the plaintiff in error, Abner Shacklett, was defendant. The object of the proceeding was to recover the sum of $67.50 for the board of the defendant’s daughter in the asylum for the period of three months. The defendant contending that the statute, Code, sec. 1677, under which.the proceeding was had, was unconstitutional, in that it discriminates between citizens of Virginia, and aims at holding the wealthy citizen liable personally for compensation for the use of said asylum, for any member of his family, whilst the poor man enjoys its use free of cost, obtained a writ of error and supersedeas to said judgment.