Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 93
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Citation | 231 U.S. 541,58 L.Ed. 354,34 S.Ct. 195 |
| Docket Number | No. 93,93 |
| Parties | J. W. SPRINGSTEAD, J. C. Burwell, W. A. Fulton, et al., Plffs. in Err., v. CRAWFORDSVILLE STATE BANK |
| Decision Date | 22 December 1913 |
v.
CRAWFORDSVILLE STATE BANK.
Mr. J. C. Davant for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. Peter O. Knight and C. Fred Thompson for defendant in error.
Memorandum opinion by Mr. Chief Justice White, by direction of the court:
This is a direct writ of error to determine a question of jurisdiction. The action arose prior to the adoption of the Judicial Code, and was on two promissory notes, each for $1,000 and each providing for the payment of a reasonable attorney's fee if suit were brought. Could
Page 542
such an attorney's fee be considered in determining whether the jurisdictional amount was involved? We think so. Clearly such fee was no part of the costs, nor was it interest. It may be that the agreement to pay an attorney's fee in the event of suit created only an accessory right (though under Brown v. Webster, 156 U. S. 328, 39 L. ed. 440, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 377, this is doubtful), but nevertheless it gave a right to recover and created a legal obligation to pay. It is true its effectiveness was dependent upon suit being brought, yet the moment suit was brought the liability to pay the fee became a 'matter in controversy,' and as such to be computed in making up the requisite jurisdictional amount. Ibid., and this has been the rule since applied by lower Federal courts. Rogers v. Riley, 80 Fed. 759; Continental Casualty Co. v. Spradlin, 95 C. C. A. 112, 170 Fed. 322; Howard v. Carroll, 195 Fed. 646.
It is further urged that though the case is within the jurisdictional amount, nevertheless it was not within the competency of the court below because of a failure to allege the citizenship of the original payee of the notes. Act of August 13, 1888, 25 Stat. at L. p. 433, chap. 866, § 1, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 508. The contention is clearly well taken. King Iron Bridge Co. v. Otoe County, 120 U. S. 225, 30 L. ed. 623, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 552; Parker v. Ormsby, 141 U. S. 81, 83, 35 L. ed. 654, 655, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 912. However, as between the plaintiff and the defendants the necessary diversity of citizenship was alleged, we are of opinion that the failure to allege the citizenship of the assignor of the paper does not compel the absolute dismissal of the case, as the error in that particular is susceptible to correction by amendment. King Iron Bridge Co. v. Otoe County,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Howard v. Globe Life Ins. Co., 3:96cv314/RV.
...requested by plaintiffs, their value will be assessed as part of the amount in controversy); Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354 (1913). As already mentioned, a putative class may not aggregate their separate and distinct claims to satisfy the ......
-
Graham v. Henegar, 79-2177
...9 See Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Jones, 290 U.S. 199, 54 S.Ct. 133, 78 L.Ed. 267 (1933); Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354 (1913); Velez v. Crown Life Ins. Co., 599 F.2d 471 (1st Cir. 1979); Clark v. National Travelers Life Ins. Co., 518......
-
York v. Guaranty Trust Co. of New York, 256.
...which therefore becomes "an essential ingredient in the * * * principal claim. * * *" See also Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541, 542, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354; Chesbrough v. Northern Trust Co., 252 U.S. 83, 40 S.Ct. 237, 64 L.Ed. 470; Chesbrough v. Woodworth, 6 Cir.,......
-
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Stevens & Ricci Inc., 15–2080
...F.Supp. 852 (1993) ]. In arriving at its conclusion, the Rowles court relied upon two cases, [Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank , 231 U.S. 541, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354 (1913) ] and [Farmers Insurance Company v. McClain, 603 F.3d 821 (10th Cir. 1979) ] which held that costs and att......
-
Graham v. Henegar, No. 79-2177
...9 See Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Jones, 290 U.S. 199, 54 S.Ct. 133, 78 L.Ed. 267 (1933); Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354 (1913); Velez v. Crown Life Ins. Co., 599 F.2d 471 (1st Cir. 1979); Clark v. National Travelers Life Ins. Co., 518......
-
York v. Guaranty Trust Co. of New York, No. 256.
...which therefore becomes "an essential ingredient in the * * * principal claim. * * *" See also Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541, 542, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354; Chesbrough v. Northern Trust Co., 252 U.S. 83, 40 S.Ct. 237, 64 L.Ed. 470; Chesbrough v. Woodworth, 6 Cir.,......
-
Howard v. Globe Life Ins. Co., No. 3:96cv314/RV.
...requested by plaintiffs, their value will be assessed as part of the amount in controversy); Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U.S. 541, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354 (1913). As already mentioned, a putative class may not aggregate their separate and distinct claims to satisfy the ......
-
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Stevens & Ricci Inc., No. 15–2080
...F.Supp. 852 (1993) ]. In arriving at its conclusion, the Rowles court relied upon two cases, [Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank , 231 U.S. 541, 34 S.Ct. 195, 58 L.Ed. 354 (1913) ] and [Farmers Insurance Company v. McClain, 603 F.3d 821 (10th Cir. 1979) ] which held that costs and att......