Cook v. Bondurant

Supreme Court of Virginia
Cook v. Bondurant, 85 Va. 47 (Va. 1888)
6 S.E. 618; 1888 Va. LEXIS 9
Lewis

Cook v. Bondurant

Opinion of the Court

Lewis, P.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The decree is for $400, with interest thereon from the 1st day of March, 1886, less $50 as of the 1st day of January, 1886, and costs, which is less in amount than $500. The fact that the land in the proceedings mentioned is ordered to he sold, unless the sum decreed against the defendant is paid within a specified time, is immaterial. As this court has repeatedly decided, the *48pecuniary demand asserted is, in such a case, the matter in com troversy, and not “the title or boundaries of land”; and when the' defendant is the appellant, as is the case here, the test of jurisdiction is the sum decreed against him. Umbarger v. Watts, 25 Gratt. 167; Harman v. City of Lynchburg, 33 Gratt. 37; Hawkins v. Gresham, ante, 34, and cases cited.

Appeal dismissed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Cook v. Bondurant and al.
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Appellate Jurisdiction&emdash;Minimum.&emdash;Where the decree is for less than $500, including interest, the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, though the decree provides that certain land be sold unless the debt be paid within a named period.