Wilderman v. Roth, 3513.
Decision Date | 17 February 1927 |
Docket Number | No. 3513.,3513. |
Parties | WILDERMAN v. ROTH et al. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Samuel R. Wachtell, of New York City, and Francis Macomb Gumbes, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff in error.
Alfred R. Haig, of Philadelphia, Pa., and Benjamin Y. Shearer, of Reading, Pa., for defendants in error.
Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
In the court below, Elizabeth Wilderman, a citizen of New York, brought suit against William Roth and others, citizens of Pennsylvania. On trial she recovered a verdict for $600, which was taken subject to the opinion of the court whether it had jurisdiction of the cause. This question — the only one here involved — the court decided against her and dismissed the suit. Whereupon she sued out this writ of error.
The pleadings show that her claim was to recover on an implied assumpsit of the defendants to pay her the reasonable worth of the domestic household service she rendered them for eight months. For such eight months' service she claimed $5,000. On the trial her proof was such that the utmost she could have recovered, or indeed could ever have expected to recover, was $200 per month — in all, $1,600. In point of fact the jury awarded her $600 or $75 per month.
Under these facts we agree with the opinion of the court, as stated in the margin,1 that the court was without jurisdiction and accordingly affirm its order of dismissal.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Palmer v. Moren
...to be purely colorable for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction, O. J. Lewis Mercantile Co. v. Klepner, 2 Cir., 176 F. 343; Wilderman v. Roth, 3 Cir., 17 F.2d 486. Jurisdiction exists where the requisite amount is set out in the complaint unless it appears to a legal certainty "that the p......
-
Cumberland v. Household Research Corp. of America
...that $3,000 could not be recovered? The fact that the claim is unliquidated does not prevent a finding that it could not be. Wilderman v. Roth, 3 Cir., 17 F.2d 486; Nixon v. Town Taxi, Inc., D.C.D.Mass., 39 F.2d 618. Examining the instant claim in its most favorable light, however, I am not......
-
Tlusty v. Gillespie-Rogers-Pyatt Co., Civil No. 1221.
... ... Wilderman v. Roth, D.C.Pa.1925, 9 F.2d 637, affirmed 3 Cir., 1927, 17 F.2d 486 ... It is ... ...
- Broadway Trust Co. v. Dill