Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
McCarthy v. Provost, 1880 — 103 U.S. 673 · caselaw · US
General
McCarthy v. Provost
103 U.S. 67326 L. Ed. 337·Supreme Court of the United States·1880
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
McCarthy v. Provost.
In a suit for partition, the value of the undivided part in controversy, and not of the.lands, determines the appellate jurisdiction of this court.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.
Mr. Thomas J. Semmes for the appellant.
Mr. Henry B. Kelly for the appellee.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Chiee Justice Waite]
Mr. Chiee Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.
We have no jurisdiction in this case. The suit was brought to recover one two hundred and fortieth part of certain lands, and for a partition so as to set off to the appellant in severalty that interest. It is averred in the bill that “ the value of the property sought to be partitioned-amounts to more than $5,000,” but the matter in dispute on this appeal is only one two hundred and fortieth part of the whole property, ag that is all the appellant claims. Our jurisdiction, therefore, depends on the value of that part, which certainly is not shown to be more than $5,000.
Appeal dismissed.