
    No. 17,359.
    Biddle v. Pierce et al.
    Appellate Court. — Jurisdiction.—Money Demand. — Amount in Controversy. — Where the amount of appellant’s (plaintiff’s) demand was $1,750 and the amount recovered was $118.48, the amount in controversy on appeal is the difference between $1,750 and $118.48, and the jurisdiction is in the Appellate Court.
    From the Montgomery Circuit Court.
    
      Billings & Son and L. J. Coppage, for appellant.
    Cr. W. Paul, M. W. Bruner, B. Crane and A. B. Anderson, for appellees.
   Monks, J.

Appellant and appellees, except Crane & Anderson, compromised an action in which they were plaintiffs, and Crane & Anderson, as their attorneys, received the sum of $7,000 in settlement of said action. There was a dispute between said plaintiffs as to how much of said sum each should receive. Appellant brought this action to recover $1,750, one-fourth of said sum of $7,000. Answers were filed by appellees and also a cross-complaint by three of appellees, in which they demanded $7,000. Answers were filed to the cross-complaint, the cause was tried by the court and a special finding made and conclusions of law stated in favor of appellant for $118.48, and in favor of each of appellees for amounts, none of which exceeded the sum of $2,116.48.

Judgment was rendered, over appellant’s motion for a new trial, on the special finding.

Appellant, at the proper time, excepted to the conclusions of law. No cross-errors are assigned. The action by appellant was for money only within the meaning of section 1336, R. S. 1894, acts 1891, p. 29, defining the jurisdiction of the Appellate Court. The amount in controversy, on appeal, is the difference between the amount demanded, $1,750, and the amount of appellant’s recovery of $118.48, which is less than $3,500.

Filed May 2, 1895.

The jurisdiction is therefore in the Appellate Court. This cause is transferred to the Appellate Court.  