amount in controversy
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 299 U.S. 269 - KVOS, Inc. v. Associated Press · 1936Most cited · 1,135 citing opinions
Where the allegations as to the amount in controversy are challenged by the defendant in an appropriate manner, the plaintiff must support them by competent proof.
How the Supreme Court has restated “amount in controversy”
Each Supreme Court definition of “amount in controversy,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “amount in controversy”
Court decisions citing the 7 opinions that defined “amount in controversy” — 3,336 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 8 definitions, chronological · 1830–1961
- ORIGINAL
After the case was opened for the plaintiff in error, the court ordered the writ of error to be dismissed, the same having been sued out by the defendant in the district court, and the sum in controversy, as to him, being no more than one hundred dollars, the amount of the verdict in that court.
writ of error by defendant below
The damages claimed by the plaintiff in his writ, gives jurisdiction to the court, whether it be an original suit in the circuit court of the United States, or brought here by petition from a state court.
for federal jurisdiction
jurisdiction is to be determined by the amount directly involved in the decree appealed from, and not by any contingent demand which may be recovered, or any contingent loss which may be sustained, by either one of the parties, through the probative effect of the decree, however direct its bearing upon such contingency.
for jurisdiction
In determining whether the requisite jurisdictional amount is in controversy, where it does not appear that the complainant is deprived of its license or is prevented by the regulation from prosecuting its business, the question is not the value or net worth of the business, but the value of the right to be free from the regulation, and this may be measured by the loss, if any, that would follow the enforcement of the rule prescribed.
regulatory challenge
when several plaintiffs assert separate and distinct demands in a single suit, the amount involved in each separate controversy must be of the requisite amount to be within the jurisdiction of the district court, and that those amounts cannot be added together to satisfy jurisdictional requirements
multiple plaintiffs
the amount in controversy in a suit to restrain illegal imposition of fees or taxes is the amount of the fees or taxes which would normally be collected during the period of the litigation
suit to restrain fees or taxes
The general federal rule has long been to decide what the amount in controversy is from the complaint itself, unless it appears or is in some way shown that the amount stated in the complaint is not claimed 'in good faith.' In deciding this question of good faith we have said that it 'must appear to a legal certainty that the claim is really for less than the jurisdictional amount to justify dismissal.