James A. Howard v. Colbert Higgins, Sheriff, Murray County, Sulphur, Oklahoma, 379 F.2d 227, 10th Cir. (1967)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsJames A. Howard v. Colbert Higgins, Sheriff, Murray County, Sulphur, Oklahoma, 379 F.2d 227, 10th Cir. (1967)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government Docs379 F.
2d 227
James A. HOWARD, Appellant,
v.
Colbert HIGGINS, Sheriff, Murray County, Sulphur,
Oklahoma, Appellee.
No. 9115.
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.
June 1, 1967.
Norman H. Glickman, Denver, Colo., for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.
Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, LEWIS, Circuit Judge, and
CHRISTENSEN, District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
This action was brought by Howard under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.
1983, with federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1343(3). The substance of the
pro se claim is that the defendant, while acting as the sheriff of Murray County,
Oklahoma, deprived the claimant of personal property valued at $500 while the
claimant was in the sheriff's custody.
The trial court dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdictional amount required by
statute, but granted leave to appeal in forma pauperis. An appointed attorney
filed a brief and argued the case for Howard. The defendant, Higgins, did not
appear but filed a pro se response in which he stated, among other things, that
he is no longer the sheriff of Murray County or in custody or control of the
property alleged to have been taken by him from the claimant while he was in
custody. He says that all of the property taken is now in the custody of the
present sheriff and will be returned to Howard if he will appear to claim it.
But we do not reach the question of mootness for we agree with the trial court
that jurisdiction is wholly lacking. Section 1343(3) confers federal jurisdiction
without regard to the amount in controversy over claims arising under Section
1983 to redress the deprivation of civil rights. Section 1983 had been
historically construed not to embrace as a civil right the deprivation of a mere
property right as in this case. See Ream v. Handley, 7 Cir., 359 F.2d 728, and
cases cited. But see Joe Louis Milk Co. v. Hershey, D.C., 243 F.Supp. 351, and
cases cited. Inasmuch as the claim here is to redress the deprivation of a
property right only, jurisdiction under Section 1343(3) is lacking. Abernathy v.
Carpenter, D.C., 208 F.Supp. 793, affm'd,373 U.S. 241, 83 S.Ct. 1295, 10
L.Ed.2d 409.
4
If the asserted claim can be said to arise under the Constitution or laws of the
United States, jurisdiction must be found in 28 U.S.C. 1331, and the court
correctly dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdictional amount. The judgment is
affirmed.
You might also like
- No ratings yetLolita Mitchell v. James v. Aluisi, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Prince George's County J. Michael O'ferrall, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Administrative Clerk for the District Court of Maryland Margaret Kostritsky, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as the Chief Clerk for the District Court of Maryland Prince George's County, Maryland Szabo, Inc., and Ronald J. Collins, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Deputy Sheriff Robert Kiker, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Deputy Sheriff of Prince George's County Samuel F. Saxton, Individually and in His Official Capacity as the Administrator of the Prince George's County, Maryland Detention Center, 872 F.2d 577, 4th Cir. (1989)7 pages
- No ratings yetGeorge McKay v. Dayle Hammock, Individually and as Detective and Deputy Sheriff for Routt County, Colorado Nick Deluca, Sheriff, Routt County, Colorado Lieutenant J.W. Pfeffer, Individually and as an Officer of the Ruidoso City Police Department, Ruidoso, New Mexico Ruidoso City Police Department, Ruidoso, Lincoln County, New Mexico and Routt County Sheriff's Office, Routt County, Colorado, 730 F.2d 1367, 10th Cir. (1984)12 pages
