Harris v. Howe

Decided May 16, 1891

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1891-05-16

<p>Appellate Court. — Proceedings Supplementary to Execution. — Jurisdiction. —The Appellate Court has exclusive jurisdiction oi a proceeding supplementary to execution, in aid of the collection of a judgment, where the amount in controversy does not exceed one thousand dollars. The fact that it may be necessary for the court to pass upon the validity of a transfer of property, where it incidentally arises, is not sufficient to deprive the Appellate Court of jurisdiction.</p>

Relies on Parker v. Indianapolis National Bank · Baker v. Groves

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1891-05-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1942

5 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Miller, J. —

¶1This was a proceeding supplementary to execution, instituted under section 819, R. S. 1881, in aid of the collection of a judgment.

¶2We are of the opinion that the cause is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Appellate Court. The action is “ for the recovery of money only,” and the amount in controversy is less than one thousand dollars. We do not think that the fact that it may be necessary for the court to pass upon the validity of a transfer of property, where it incidentally arises, is sufficient to deprive the Appellate Court of jurisdiction. Baker v. Groves, 126 Ind. 593; Parker v. Indianapolis Nat’l Bank, 126 Ind. 595.

¶3The clerk of this court is, therefore, directed to transfer this cause to the Appellate Court for final determination.