Brown v. Ellis

• Decision Date: 28 June 1899
• Citation: 95 F. 1
• Parties: BROWN v. ELLIS.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Vermont

95 F. 1

BROWN v. ELLIS.

United States Circuit Court, D. Vermont.

June 28, 1899

Thomas J. Boynton, for plaintiff.

Hiram A. Huse, for defendant.

Wheeler District Judge

The plaintiff is receiver of the Sioux City National Bank of Sioux City, Iowa; the defendant is executrix of the will of a shareholder therein; and this suit is brought to reach the assets of the estate in satisfaction of an assessment by the comptroller of the currency upon the shares of the estate amounting to $1,800. The case was before this court in Brown v. Ellis, 86 F. 357, upon a question of reaching the assets of the estate. It has now been heard upon a motion to dismiss for want of the jurisdictional amount of $2,000, exclusive of interest and costs, in controversy. Section 629 of the Revised Statutes gave jurisdiction to the circuit courts:

'First. Of all suits of a civil nature at common law or in equity where the matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of five hundred dollars, where an alien is a party, or the suit is between a citizen of the state where it is brought and a citizen of another state.

'Second. Of all suits in equity where the matter in dispute exclusive of costs, exceeds the sum or value of five hundred dollars and the United States are petitioners.

'Third. Of all suits at common law where the United States, or any officer thereof suing under the authority of any act of congress, are plaintiffs.

'Tenth. Of all suits by or against any banking association established in the district for which the court is held under any law providing for national banking associations.' The act of 1875 (18 Stat. 470) gave jurisdiction 'of all suits of a civil nature at common law or in equity, where the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive of costs, the sum or value of five hundred dollars, and arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, or treaties made or which shall be made under their authority, or in which the United States are plaintiffs or petitioners, or in which there shall be a controversy between citizens of different states, or a controversy between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, or a controversy between citizens of a state and foreign states citizens or subjects. ' The act of 1888 (25 Stat. 433) construing the act of 1887, re-enacted this part of the act of 1875, changing the requirement of amount in dispute from $500 exclusive of costs to $2,000 exclusive of interest and costs, and provided by a new section (4) that national banking associations should, for the purposes of suits, be deemed citizens of the states where located, and that the circuit and district courts should not have jurisdiction therein other than such as they...