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.
Parker v. Latey, 1870 — 79 U.S. 390 · caselaw · US
General
Parker v. Latey
79 U.S. 39012 Wall. 390·Supreme Court of the United States·1870
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
Parker v. Latey.
Writ of error to a Circuit Court in an ejectment dismissed, where the record stated that the land for which the suit was brought was “ of the value of $500 and over.”
Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Nebraska.
Parker brought ejectment against Latey-to recover possession of a certain tract of.land situate in the city of Omaha, in the State of Nebraska, désoribed in the declaration, and there stated to be of “ the.value of $500 and over.” Verdict and judgment were for the defendant, and the plaintiff sued out this writ of error.
Mr. J. J. 'Redick, for the defendant in t, ror,
moved to dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction; the Judiciary Act giving jurisdiction to this court on writs of error to Circuit Courts only “ where the matter in' dispute exceeds the sum dr value of $2000.”
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice CLIFFORD]
Mr. Justice CLIFFORD
delivered the opinion of the court.
Objection is made by the defendant that the matter in controversy does not exceed two thousand dollars, and upon an examination of the record the objection appears to be well founded. Enough must appear to show affirmatively that the jurisdiction exists, and as it does not in this case, the writ of error must be
Dismissed. .