Fuller v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 09 August 1887 |
| Parties | FULLER and another v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO. and another. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
L. A. Fuller, for complainants.
Arnoux, Ritch & Woodford, for defendants.
Issue has been joined in this case by filing an answer, and the complainant has thereupon taken and completed his proof. Defendants now move to dismiss the bill view of the law, they may, putting in such further testimony as they may be advised, proceed hereafter to try the case over again, at another term, and probably before another judge. The inconvenience of such a practice is manifest, and as it is concededly novel, defendants being unable to point to a single case, reported or unreported, in which it has been approved, this court must decline to sanction its inauguration.
Defendants also claim that the court has no jurisdiction; the amount in controversy not exceeding $500. Inasmuch as its jurisdiction may be challenged at any time, they contend that the court should now dismiss the bill on that ground. The defendants concede that upon the bill alone such a motion would not prevail, it being 'possible to infer from the bill, standing alone, the existence of a state of facts by reason of which the amount in controversy might exceed $500. ' But they contend that 'looking through the testimony with a view to discovering the amount in controversy,' it becomes evident that there is a total failure on the part of the complainant to show a sufficient amount in controversy to sustain the jurisdiction. If, however, this is to be determined by a consideration of the proof as well as the pleading, such determination is neither more nor less than a trial, and must, like other trials, be had at the regular term assigned for such business.
The preliminary objection raised by complainant to the hearing of this motion is therefore sustained, and the motion dismissed, for the reasons indicated above.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Electrical Accumulator Co. v. Brush Electric Co.
...are questions which go to the merits of the case, and we have no right to consider them upon a motion to dismiss the bill. Fuller v. Insurance Co., 31 F. 696. The whether an interference exists or not is one which must be determined from an inspection of the pleadings and proofs, a question......
-
Fuller v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
...Insurance Company of the city of New York, and Joseph F. Knapp. Many of the leading facts appear in Fuller v. Knapp, 24 F. 100. See, also, 31 F. 696. The seek to ascertain the amount due under certain stipulations of a policy of life insurance, which provide that the policy is issued upon t......
-
In re Keaho's Estate
... ... merits of a cause more than once. See Fuller v. Met. Ins ... Co., 31 F. 696. If a defendant without resting desires ... ...