
    Sarah Cabrara v. W. H. Dinkgrave, et al.
    Where the real amountin dispute is less than three hundred dollars, and there is added to it a claim for five hundred dollars for damages, evidently fictitious, the appeal will be dismissed by the Supreme Court for want of jurisdiction.
    APPEAL from the District Court of Ouachita, Copley, J.
    
      McGuire and Ray, for plaintiff.
    
      Garrett and Ludeling, for defendants.
   The judgment of the court was pronounced by

Preston, J.

The plaintiff enjoined an execution against her husband, for less than two hundred dollars. To obtain the injunction, she gave bond and security in the sum of two hundred dollars. She enjoined the execution on the ground, that the tract of land seized, and about to be sold, belonged to her. She alleged that it was given to her by her husband, in payment of her paraphernal rights, to the amount of two hundred and fifty, dollars, and we have no other evidence of the value of the land.

The appellees have moved to dismiss this appeal, on the ground that this court has no jurisdiction, the amount in controversy being less than three hundred dollars. The motion must prevail. 2d Ann. 793, 911. Code of Practice, art. 570. 9 R. R. 7. •

It is true the plaintiff, in the injunction, claimed five hundred dollars damages. The claim was evidently fictitious, and cannot give this court jurisdiction,

The appeal is dismissed at the cost of the appellant.  