Case Citator › Wilson v. Daniel

Wilson v. Daniel

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
3 U.S. 401
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
5 of 5
Citing cases (total)
5
Treatment dates
1830
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Wilson v. Daniel was overruled in part. All 5 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

Gordon v. Ogden rejected Wilson's rule for measuring the amount in controversy on a defendant's writ of error, but did not address Wilson's separate holding that an informal final judgment could be reviewed. The Constitution Annotated lists Wilson as overruled by Gordon; the confirmed treatment of its jurisdictional rule is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

5 later cases cite Wilson v. Daniel; 5 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Wilson v. Daniel?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Supreme Court rejected Wilson's rule that the amount in controversy on a defendant's writ of error turns on the value put in demand before judgment.

    Gordon v. Ogden · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The counsel for the plaintiff ift error relies on the case of Wilson vs. Daniel, 3 Dall. 401. That case,- it is admitted, is in pdfnf.-.-.It turns on the- principle that the jurisdiction of this court depénds on the sqm which was in dispute before the judgment was rendered in the circuit court. Although that case was decided-by a divided court, and although we-thjnk, that upon the true construction of the iwenty.-secon.d,section of the judicial act, the jurisdiction of the court-depends- upon thejs.um in dispute between the parties ni the case stands upon the-writ of error-,-wo should be much inclined to adhere to the decision in Wilson vs. Daniel, had not a contrary practice since prevailed. ... We are all of opinion that the writ of error be dismissed, the court having no jurisdiction of the cause.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Wilson v. Daniel and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace