Scott v. Frazier
Scott Et Al. v. Frazier Et Al.
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion
*244 Memorandum opinion by direction of the court, by Mr. Justice Day.
This suit so far as the merits are concerned is like No. 811, just decided, ante, 233. It was brought in the District Court of the United States for the district of North Dakota to enjoin the payment of public funds in the State Treasury and the issuing of state, bonds under the' constitution and laws of North Dakota. We have sufficiently stated the nature of this constitution ánd the laws involved in the opinion in No. 811.
The jurisdiction was invoked because of alleged violátion of rights under the- Fourteenth Amendment. The complainants were taxpayers of North Dakota who alleged that suit was brought on behalf of themselves and all other taxpayers of the State. There was no diversity of citizenship and jurisdiction was rested solely upon the alleged violation of constitutional rights. The District Court rendered a decree dismissing the bill on the merits, the judge stating that he was of opinion that there was no jurisdiction and directing the dismissal on the merits to prevent delay and to permit the suit being brought here by a single appeal.
There is no allegation that the loss or injury to any complainant amounts to the sum of $3,000. It is well settled that in such cases as this the amount in controversy must equal the jurisdictional sum as to each complainant.
Wheless v. St. Louis, 180 U. S. 379 ;
Rogers v. Hennepin County, 239 U. S. 621 .
The'District Court was right in its conclusion that there was no jurisdiction. The decree is reversed and the' cause remanded to the District Court with, directions to dismiss the bill for want of jurisdiction.
So ordered.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 43 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- William M. Schreiber v. Richard G. Lugar, as Mayor of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis, Indiana
- Haguer v. Committee for Industrial Organization
- Stromberg Metal Works, Inc., and Comfort Control, Inc. v. Press Mechanical, Inc.
- Snow v. Ford Motor Co.
- Potrero Hill Community Action Committee, Etc. v. The Housing Authority of the City and County of San Francisco
- Elliott v. Empire Natural Gas Co.
Most recent
- Stromberg Metal Works, Inc., and Comfort Control, Inc. v. Press Mechanical, Inc.
- Griffin v. Dana Point Condominium Ass'n
- William B. Glover, Weeks Smith, William L. Bazemore v. Johns-Manville Corporation, a Delaware Corporation Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Successor by Merger With Johns-Manville Products Corporation, a Delaware Corporation Unarco Industries, Inc., Formerly Known as Union Asbestos and Rubber Company, a Delaware Corporation H. K. Porter Company, Inc., Thermoid Division, a Delaware Corporation Southern Textile Company, a Delaware Corporation Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., a Connecticut Corporation Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, the Celotex Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, a Delaware Corporation J. P. Stevens& Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., an Ohio Corporation Amatex Corporation, a Pennsylvania Corporation, Gaf Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Third Party v. United States
- Glover v. Johns-Manville Co.
- Alvah L. Snow, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Ford Motor Company, a Corporation, Doe I Through L, Inclusive
- Snow v. Ford Motor Co.
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.