
    Hoppe v. Byers and Jennings.
    Jurisdiction: amount in controversy: attachment. In an action by attachment, before a justice of the peace, the amount in controversy, which determines the question of jurisdiction is, not the value of the property attached, but the amount of the judgment and costs.
    
      Appeal from Lee Ovreuit (Jowt.
    
    Wednesday, October 21.
    This action was brought by the plaintiff against the defendant, Byers, before a justice of the peace, by attachment, upon a note for $88.75. Among- the property attached was one mule and a double harness. Judgment was rendered against the defendant for the debt and costs. But the intervenor, in proper time, filed his petition of intervention, claiming the mule and harness. Hpon a jury trial, the right to the possession of the property was found in the plaintiff. Jennings appealed to the Circuit Court, and there, it being admitted that the mule and harness were worth $107, the plaintiff moved to dismiss the case because the court had no jurisdiction, since it involved over $100, and came by appeal from a justice. This motion was overruled. The plaintiff excepted and appeals.
    
      Gibson Browne, for appellant.
    
      Gillmore c& Anderson, for appellees.
   Cole, J.

The ruling of the Circuit Court was correct, because the amount in controversy was the aggregate of the debt and costs, which is less than a hundred dollars, and not the value of the property, which exceeded that sum'. The plaintiff did not claim the mule and harness, but only the right to subject so much of the value of them as should be sufficient to satisfy his debt and costs. As to the excéss of value, there is .no controversy between these parties; the intervenor may take that, so far as any claim thereto by this plaintiff is concerned.

Affirmed.  