
    Mohme v. Livingston.
    1. Appeal: jurisdiction: amount in controversy. Upon an appeal from the judgment in an action of replevin, where the plaintiff’s right to the property is not denied, and the only issue is as to the value of the defendant’s interest therein, the amount claimed by him being less than one hundred dollars, a question of law must be certified by the trial judge to give the Supreme Court jurisdiction of the case.
    
      Appeal from Keolcak Circuit Com't.
    
    Wednesday, October 6.
    Action of replevin to recover the possession of nineteen head of cattle of the alleged value of $250. The cause was tried before the court without a jury, and a judgment was rendered for defendant for $23.75, the value of his interest in the property as found by the court. Plaintiff appeals.
    
      Sampson & Brown, and A. D. Gortner, for appellant.
    
      Woodin ds McJunMn, and Harmed ds Fonda, for appellee.
   Beck, J.

The answer alleges that the cattle replevied were found by defendant, who is marshal of the town of Sigourney, running at large within the corporate limits of town in violation of an ordinance thereof, and were taken up and impounded under the provisions of the ordinance. The ordinance provides that the marshal shall be allowed fifty cents a day for keeping and fifty cents for impounding each head of cattle, which shall be paid by the owner. The pleadings show that the marshal impounded nineteen head of cattle. He kept them in pound two days. The court found that the cattle were lawfully imimpounded. The defendant’s interest in the cattle is the amount due him under the ordinance. The pleadings, as presented before us in the abstract, shows such interest to be of the value of $28.50. The ownership of plaintiff, and his right to the possession of the property, are not denied in the answer. The only issue in the case, as shown by the pleadings, is the value of defendant’s interest. Davis v. Upright, post. Such interest being less than one hundred dollars, and there being no certificate of the judge of the court below authorizing the appeal, we have not jurisdiction of the case. Code, § 3173. The appeal is, therefore,

Dismissed.  