WELLS & Others v. WILKINS
Wells and Others v. Wilkins
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court. These are suits in ejectment, each for a separate and distinct.
*394 part of a lot in Pensacola. A judgment was rendered in each case1 for the recovery of the premises sued for in that case. Neither the pleadings nor the evidence found in the records show the value of the property, but on suing out the writs of error the plaintiffs in error in each case filed two affidavits to ' the effect that the value was more than $5000. ’ Since the cases were docketed here, however, the defendant in error has filed counter affidavits which prove beyond all doubt that this is a mistake, and that the value in every one of the cases is very much less than our jurisdictional limit.
The writs of error are consequently all dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Goldstucker & Another v. Wilkins. Wells & Others v. Wilkins. Wells & Others v. Wilkins. Wells & Others v. Wilkins. Wells & Another v. Wilkins. All in error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Florida. These cases were all submitted at the same time, and by the same counsel, with Wells v. Wilkins reported above, and are, for the reasons given in the above opinion, all Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.