Opinion
December 4, 1944.
January 3, 1945.
Appeals — Courts — Jurisdiction — Amount in controversy — Determination — Amount of judgment — Acts of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, and May 5, 1899, P. L. 248.
1. Where the plaintiff has recovered a judgment in some amount of money and appellate jurisdiction depends upon the amount in controversy, that amount is conclusively fixed by the amount of the judgment: section 7(c) of the Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, as amended and supplemented by section 4 of the Act of May 5, 1899, P. L. 248. [242-3]
2. It was Held that an appeal from a judgment for $141.60, entered after a verdict for $5,255.83 was set aside, must be taken to the Superior Court. [242-3]
Argued Dec. 4, 1944.
Before MAXEY, C. J. DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON, STEARNE and HUGHES, JJ.
Appeal, No. 263, Jan. T., 1944, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1943, No. 3323, in case of Marie Glaser v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America. Appeal remitted to Superior Court.
Assumpsit. Before SMITH, P. J.
Verdict for plaintiff in sum representing amount of insurance with interest; upon motion by defendant judgment reduced to amount of premiums paid. Plaintiff appealed.
Samuel C. Nissenbaum, for appellant.
Kendall H. Shoyer, with him Andrew C. Dana, for appellee.
In this action on an insurance policy insuring the life of plaintiff's husband, she recovered a verdict in the sum of $5,255.83. On defendant's motion the verdict was set aside and judgment was entered for the plaintiff for $141.60, which was the amount payable by the defendant by way of return of premiums. She appealed to this court.
Recently, in Gerber v. Jones, 344 Pa. 277, 25 A.2d 141, we said, "Where, as here, the question of jurisdiction depends upon the amount in controversy, the mode by which the amount shall be determined is fixed by Section 4 of the Act of May 5, 1899, P. L. 248, amending and supplementing section 7(c) of the Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, and providing, inter alia, as follows: 'In any suit, distribution or other proceeding in the common pleas or orphans' court, if the plaintiff or claimant recovers damages either for a tort or for a breach of contract, the amount of the judgment, decree or award shall be conclusive proof of the amount really in controversy, but if he recovers nothing the amount really in controversy shall be determined by the amount of damages claimed in the statement of claim, or in the declaration.' While the statutory rule may not always determine the amount involved with absolute accuracy, it provides a uniform standard for the ascertainment of appellate jurisdiction, according to the amount really in controversy between the parties as the case stood when the questions which it is sought to have reviewed arose, and is intended to apply in all actions involving the payment of money, except, of course, those as to which the jurisdiction on appeal is otherwise provided for by law. See Prentice v. Hancock, 204 Pa. 128; Green v. Duffee, 231 Pa. 393; Schuetz's Estate, 315 Pa. 105. "
As the amount of the judgment is less than $2,500.00 the appeal should have been taken to the Superior Court.
Appeal remitted to the Superior Court.