Morrow v. Bell

• Decision Date: 08 April 1915
• Docket Number: No. 29995.,29995.
• Citation: 170 Iowa 17,151 N.W. 1084
• Parties: MORROW v. BELL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

170 Iowa 17

151 N.W. 1084

MORROW

v.BELL.

No. 29995.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

April 8, 1915.

Appeal from District Court, Harrison County; E. B. Woodruff, Judge.

Appeal from the ruling of the district court dismissing defendant's appeal. Affirmed.Cochran & Barrett, of Logan, for appellant.

L. W. Fallon, of Logan, for appellee.

PRESTON, J.

The suit was brought in justice court. Plaintiff's petition claimed $20, which was denied by the answer, and defendant claimed $6.50 on a counterclaim, which was denied by plaintiff. Judgment was rendered by the justice for $20 against the defendant, and defendant appealed to the district court. Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the amount in controversy was less than $25, and the motion was sustained. The trial court allowed a certificate of appeal to this court.

The argument for appellant is that section 4547 of the Code provides, in reference to appeals from justice court, that no such appeal shall be allowed when the amount in controversy does not exceed $25. And appellant says that this section has been construed by the Supreme Court as meaning that the amount in controversy as claimed by the pleadings, using the plural and thereby referring to the petition and answer. They cite Nichols v. Wood, 66 Iowa, 225, 23 N. W. 641;Lundak v. Railway, 65 Iowa, 473, 21 N. W. 783;Perry v. Conger, 65 Iowa, 588, 22 N. W. 688. They argue that the amount in controversy, therefore, as shown by these pleadings, would be $20, plus $6.50, or $26.50, and that, upon this theory, the motion to dismiss should have been overruled.

The point decided in the cases cited is that the amount in controversy should be determined from pleadings in the case, and not from the judgment rendered by the justice. In the last case, the plaintiff's claim was for $100 damages, but on the trial plaintiff recovered judgment for five cents damages, and the costs, which were taxed at $27. The trial court dismissed the appeal on the ground that the amount in controversy was less than $25. The plaintiff had claimed $100, and on appeal was entitled to a retrial of the questions involved, and it was held that, if plaintiff could establish the whole amount of his claim, he would be entitled to judgment for that amount. The amount in controversy must be determined by the pleadings. Ordinarily this is determined by the amount claimed by plaintiff in his petition.

It is stated in Cyc. that, broadly, the amount involved in controversy is the highest sum, according to the statutory limitation, for which judgment can be rendered. 2 Cyc. 555. It is also said, at page 558, same volume of Cyc., that it is not always the sum demanded, or claimed, which controls, but that which is actually in controversy between the parties as the case stands in the appellate court, to ascertain which the appellate court may look into the entire record; or, as otherwise stated, the amount is determined by the case as it stands in the appellate court rather than by the amount in controversy in the lower court. As bearing somewhat upon this, see, also, Pierce v. Wade, 100 U. S. 444, 25 L. Ed. 735.

The...