CHAPTER XVIII. APPEALS TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. 492. Jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of Appeals.Circuit Courts of Appeals have jurisdiction to review final decisions of the District Courts in all cases except those in which appeals may be taken directly to the Supreme Court or in which some special statute otherwise provides.1 493. The Appellate Jurisdiction of a Circuit Court of Appeals Does Not Usually Depend Upon the Amount in Controversy.-Ordinarily appeals may be taken from the District Court irrespective of the amount in controversy. To this general rule there are some exceptions imposed by the terms of particular Federal statutes. Thus, a decision of the District Court allowing or rejecting, upon the facts, a claim in bankruptcy, is appealable, if the claim amounts to as much as $500, and not otherwise. One who has sued the United States cannot appeal from a decision adverse to him unless his claim either exceeds $3,000, or has been forfeited to the United States for fraud under section 172 of the Judicial Code. To avoid misapprehension, it should be stated that the United States may appeal in any case in which there has been a judgment against it, no matter how small is the amount in controversy. 1 494. Appeals on the Facts May Be Taken From Decisions in Bankruptcy Proceedings in Three Classes of Cases Only. The right to appeal generally, as in equity, from decisions of the District Courts so as to secure a review both of the facts and of the law, is limited in bankruptcy proceedings to three classes of questions-adjudications, discharges and claims of $500 or upwards. No matter whether Judicial Code, sec. 128. 'Bankruptcy Act, sec. 25, par. A, clause 3. Reid vs. United States, 211 U. S. 529. an adjudication be decreed or refused, a discharge granted or denied, or a claim for as much as $500 allowed or rejected, the party aggrieved may appeal as of right, precisely as he can from a final decree in equity.1 In matters of law, all proceedings of the District Courts in bankruptcy, whether interlocutory or final, other than the three just mentioned, may be superintended and revised by the Circuit Courts of Appeals.2 Both the provisions cited have reference to proceedings in bankruptcy proper as distinguished from controversies arising in bankruptcy proceedings. In the latter class of disputes there is the same right of appeal as in independent controversies originating otherwise than in bankruptcy. It is not expedient here to attempt to draw with precision the line which divides proceedings in bankruptcy from controversies arising in bankruptcy proceedings. "The former, broadly speaking, covering questions between the alleged bankrupt and his creditors, as such, commencing with the petition for adjudication, ending with the discharge, and including matters of administration generally, such as appointments of receivers and trustees, sales, exemptions, allowances, and the like, to be disposed of summarily, all of which naturally occur in the settlement of the estate." The latter, speaking with like breadth, involve "questions between the trustee, representing the bankrupt and his creditors, on the one side, and adverse claimants, on the other, concerning property in the possession of the trustee or of the claimants. to be litigated in appropriate plenary suits, and not affecting directly the administrative orders and judgments, but only the question of the extent of the estate." The whole subject is elaborately considered in the various standard text-books on bankruptcy. 495. In What Cases the Decisions of the Circuit Courts of Appeals Are Final.—The Circuit Courts of r 1 Bankruptcy Act, sec. 25a. Bankruptcy Act, sec. 24b. 'In re Friend, 134 Fed. 778. Appeals were created to lessen the burdens of the Supreme Court and to promote the prompt dispatch of business. Neither of these results would be attained if every party against whom they decided had a right to carry his case to the Supreme Court. The Judicial Code1 therefore provides that their decisions shall be final in all admiralty cases, in those in which jurisdiction is dependent entirely upon diverse citizenship, and in all cases arising under the patent, copyright, revenue or criminal laws. For the most part the statutory provisions as to the finality of the decisions of these Courts speak for themselves. A little may be profitably said about them. 496. Do.-Under the Federal Trade-Mark Laws.— By the Trade-Mark Act of 1905,1 the Circuit Courts of Appeals are given appellate jurisdiction in cases arising under the trade-mark laws. It is provided that the decisions of those Courts in such cases may be reviewed by the Supreme Court upon certiorari in the same manner provided for patent causes. It has been held that by the use of such language, Congress intended that the decision of the Circuit Courts of Appeal in the absence of certiorari should be final in trademark precisely as in patent causes.2 497. Do.-In Cases in Which Federal Jurisdiction is Based Solely on Diverse Citizenship.—Whether jurisdiction depends solely upon diverse citizenship must be determined by an examination of the grounds upon which it was originally invoked. If from the plaintiff's statement of his own case, it does not appear that any ground of jurisdiction other than diverse citizenship exists, the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals will be final, even though in the progress of the case other questions arose of which the Federal Courts would have had jurisdiction independently of the citizenship of the parties.1 It is, not necessary, how 'Hutchinson, Pierce & Co. vs. Loewy, 217 U. S. 457. 1 Colorado Central Consolidated Mining Co. vs. Turck, 150 U. S. 138. ever, that the plaintiff shall in so many words base his claim that the Court had jurisdiction on anything other than diverse citizenship; if such other ground actually appears on the face of his pleadings. It makes no difference that he obviously did not appreciate its jurisdictional significance.2 When one of the parties is a corporation organized under the laws of the United States and is not a national bank, jurisdiction arises under the laws of the United States. The decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals is therefore reviewable on appeal by the Supreme Court. As has been explained, for the purposes of the jurisdiction of the United States Courts, the Federal statutes assimilate national banks to State corporations. The Federal Court may have jurisdiction of a suit to which a national bank is a party. That jurisdiction may rest solely upon the fact that the national bank is located in one State and its adversary is a citizen of another State or is an alien. It is held that, in such a case, the jurisdiction of the District Court rests upon diverse citizenship. The decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals, upon appeal from a judgment or decree of the District Court, is therefore final.3 498. In Criminal Cases it is Only the Defendant Below Who May Invoke the Jurisdiction of a Circuit Court of Appeals.-As has been already stated, the United States may under some circumstances carry up a criminal case. When it does, its appeal must go directly to the Supreme Court; on the other hand, an appeal of the accused is taken to the Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision of the latter is final unless the Supreme Court sees fit to grant a writ of certiorari. This writ is granted sparingly, and the criminal cases in which it is allowed are very few. 499. Decisions of Circuit Courts of Appeal Are Final in All Cases in Which the Amount in Controversy Does Not Exceed $1,000.-Section 241 of the Judi Union Pacific Ry. Co. vs. Harris, 158 U. S. 326; Ex parte Jones, 164 U. S. 691. Continental National Bank vs. Buford, 191 U. S. 119. cial Code gives a right of appeal from a judgment or decree of a Circuit Court of Appeals in every case in which the I decision of the latter is not made final and in which the amount in controversy exceeds $1,000 besides costs. 500. How the Amount in Controversy is Determined for Purposes of Appeal.—It will be noticed that in stating the sum necessary to give a right of appeal, interest is not expressly excluded, as it is by section 24 in fixing the amount required to be in controversy in order to give jurisdiction to the District Court. It follows that interest accrued before the judgment of the Court below and disposed of by its decree, if in dispute, between the parties, is a part of the sum in controversy; as, for example, when the principal sum of $1,000 and seventeen years' interest thereon at six per cent was the matter in dispute, it was held that the amount in controversy exceeded $2,000.1 The rule was well stated in a subsequent Supreme Court case in which it was said that "when the judgment is for the defendant or for the plaintiff, and for less than two thousand dollars, and the plaintiff sues out the writ of error, this court has jurisdiction if the damages claimed in the declaration exceed that sum; but that if the judgment is for plaintiff and not more than two thousand dollars, and the defendant prosecutes in error, this court has not jurisdiction, for the amount in controversy, as to the defendant, is fixed by the judgment. In determining the jurisdictional sum or amount it is obvious that neither interest on the judgment nor costs of suit can enter into the computation, for costs form no part of the matter in dispute, and interest on the judgment can only arise after rendition, while the jurisdictional amount, if determined by the judgment, is fixed at rendition."2 To give jurisdiction, the statutory amount must be really in controversy. At a time when the Supreme Court had 1 United States Bank vs. Daniel, 12 Peters, 52. 2 Walker vs. United States, 4 Wall. 163. |