Pleasants v. Greenhow

Decision Date20 April 1885
Citation29 L.Ed. 204,114 U.S. 323,5 S.Ct. 931
PartiesPLEASANTS v. GREENHOW, Treasurer, etc. 1
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Wm. L. Royall, Wager Swayne, and D. H. Chamberlain, for appellant.

F. S. Blair, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

MATTHEWS, J.

This is a bill in equity filed by the appellant, a citizen of Virginia, praying that the defendant, Greenhow, treasurer of the city of Richmond, may be perpetually enjoined from taking steps, by distraint of the complainant's property, to collect certain taxes claimed by the defendant to be due to the state of Virginia, amounting to $36.25, but for which the bill avers the complainant tendered in payment the exact amount thereof, for a part, coupons cut from bonds issued by the state under the act of March 30, 1871, and part in money. On demurrer to the bill, it was dismissed by the circuit court for want of jurisdiction, the amount in controversy being less than $500, and the complainant has brought this appeal. It is sought to maintain the jurisdiction in this case on the ground that the suit is authorized by section 1979, Rev. St., jurisdiction to entertain which is conferred by the sixteenth clause of section 629, Rev. St. The case comes within the decision just rendered in Carter v. Greenhow, ante, 928, and is governed by it. It is not, in our opinion, such a suit as is contemplated by the sections of the Revised Statutes referred to. As the sum or value in controversy does not exceed $500, the suit cannot be maintained as a case arising under the constitution and laws of the United States, provided for in the act of March 3, 1875, c. 137, (18 St. 470.) The bill was, therefore, rightly dismissed.

The decree of the circuit court is accordingly affirmed.

1 See dissenting opinion, Post, 962.

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Wynn v. Indiana State Department of Public Welfare
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana
    • July 20, 1970
    ...the Commerce Clause. Moreover, Carter v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 317 5 S.Ct. 928, 962, 29 L.Ed. 202, 207 (1885); Pleasants v. Greenhow, supra, 114 U. S. 323 330, 5 S.Ct. 931, 29 L.Ed. 204, and Holt v. Indiana Mfg. Co., supra, 176 U.S. 68 20 S.Ct. 272, 44 L.Ed. 374, are still on the books limitin......
  • Lynch v. Household Finance Corporation 8212 5058
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 23, 1972
    ...to claims deprivation of personal liberties. Carter v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 317, 5 S.Ct. 928, 29 L.Ed. 202; Pleasants v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 323, 5 S.Ct. 931, 29 L.Ed. 204; Holt v. Indiana Mfg. Co., 176 U.S. 68, 20 S.Ct. 272, 44 L.Ed. 374. The appellees also rely on two recent affirmances, wit......
  • Tm Park Ave. Associates v. Pataki
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • March 25, 1999
    ... ... § 1983 ...         This issue was first addressed in Carter v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 317, 5 S.Ct. 928, 29 L.Ed. 202 (1885). In Carter, the State of Virginia passed legislation in 1879 "to provide a plan of settlement of ... ...
  • Eisen v. Eastman
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • November 28, 1969
    ...as violating the Constitution. Essaying the task of definition, which the Court had side-stepped in Pleasants v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 323, 330, 5 S.Ct. 931, 29 L.Ed. 204 (1885), and Holt v. Indiana Mfg. Co., supra, he thought the special jurisdictional statute applied "whenever the right or i......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT