Gordon v. Carver, 7670
| Decision Date | 19 December 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 7670,7670 |
| Citation | 409 S.W.2d 878 |
| Parties | H. L. GORDON et ux., Appellants, v. Russell E. CARVER et ux., Appellees. . Amarillo |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Ochsner, Nobles & Baughman, Amarillo, Harold W. Ochsner, Amarillo, of counsel, for appellants.
Cowsert & Bybee, Hereford, J. Edward Line, Hereford, of counsel, for appellees.
This case originated in the Justice Court by written pleadings. Appellees Russell E. Carver and wife sued H. L. Gordon and wife for recision of the sale of a knitting machine. The plaintiffs alleged the knitting machine was not as represented; a tender of the knitting machine was made into court; and that plaintiffs purchased said machine from Mrs. Gordon and 'paid to her the sum of $200.00'. The petition prayed for recovery of this sum. The defendants answered by general denial. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiffs for $200.00 together with interest from date of judgment and the defendants appealed to the County Court.
The defendants filed a plea to the jurisdiction in the County Court challenging the jurisdiction of the Justice Court on the ground the amount in controversy was in fact $201.00 rather than $200.00 as alleged in the petition; and that the reduced amount was alleged for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction upon the Justice Court. Attached to the plea to the jurisdiction was a photostatic copy of a written momorandum listing the knitting machine with a sales price of $179.50, a tax of $3.50 and a table at $18.00, totalling $201.00. Mrs. Carver signed a receipt for these items. With leave of the County Court, plaintiffs amended their original petition by decreasing their demand to $196.50 alleging this to be the amount paid for the knitting machine and table. The trial court overruled the plea to the jurisdiction without a hearing and entered judgment for plaintiffs for $196.50.
It is the general rule that the question of jurisdiction, insofar as the amount in controversy is concerned, is determined by the petition, and is concluded by the averments insofar as they state facts in relation to the thing in controversy. Salter v. Nelson (Tex.Civ.App.) 341 S.W.2d 567. Manning v. Lesher (Tex.Civ.App.) 290 S.W.2d 538. The amount in controversy is determined by the value to the plaintiff of the right he asserts in good faith in his pleadings which set forth the facts constituting his cause of action. Brannon v. Pacific Employers Insurance Company, 148 Tex. 289, 224 S.W.2d 466 and cases cited therein. The petition will be accepted as true for purposes of jurisdiction regardless of the truth of the allegations unless it is made to appear by pleadings and proof that the allegations were fraudulently made for the purposes of wrongfully conferring jurisdiction. Barnes v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (Tex.Civ.App.) 279 S.W.2d 919. 15 Tex.Jur.2d, Courts, Section 71.
In the instant case the averments in the written pleadings in the Justice Court do confer jurisdiction. Although the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michael v. Travis Cty. Hous. Auth.
...true. See Flowers, 766 S.W.2d at 827; Delk v. City of Dallas, 560 S.W.2d 519, 520 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1977, no writ); Gordon v. Carver, 409 S.W.2d 878, 879 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1966, no writ); see also Continental Coffee Prods. Co. v. Cazarez, 937 S.W.2d 444, 449 (Tex. 1996). Beca......
-
Long v. Fox
...466 (1949); Williams v. Le Garage De La Paix, Inc., 562 S.W.2d 534 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston (14th Dist.) 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Gordon v. Carver, 409 S.W.2d 878 (Tex.Civ.App.-Amarillo 1966, no It is also well settled that a demand for attorneys' fees in a petition constitutes a part of the ......
-
Little-Tex Insulat. v. Gen. Serv. Comm'n.
...true. See Flowers, 766 S.W.2d at 827; Delk v. City of Dallas, 560 S.W.2d 519, 520 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1977, no writ); Gordon v. Carver, 409 S.W.2d 878, 879 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1966, no writ); see also Continental Coffee Prods. Co. v. Cazarez, 937 S.W.2d 444, 449 (Tex. 1996). Beca......
-
Bakery Equipment and Service Co., Inc. v. Aztec Equipment Co.
...jurisdiction. Barnes v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company (Tex.Civ.App.) 279 S.W.2d 919. 15 Tex.Jur.2d, Courts, Section 71. 409 S.W.2d 878 (Tex.Civ.App. Amarillo 1966, no writ). In the case before us the averments in the written pleadings in the county court conferred jurisdiction o......