Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · U.S. Code · Title 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE · CHAPTER 133— REVIEW—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS · § 2108

§ 2108. Proof of amount in controversy

178 words·~1 min read·/usc/title-28/section-2108

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Where the power of any court of appeals to review a case depends upon the amount or value in controversy, such amount or value, if not otherwise satisfactorily disclosed upon the record, may be shown and ascertained by the oath of a party to the case or by other competent evidence.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 963.)
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 231 (Feb. 13, 1925, ch. 229, § 9, 43 Stat. 941).
Words “or in the Supreme Court” were omitted. Section 7 of the 1925 act containing such words related to review by the Supreme Court of the United States of decisions of the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands and designated a certain jurisdictional amount. Such section 7 has now become obsolete, in view of the recognition of the independence of the Philippines, title 48 U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 1240, Territories and Insular Possessions, and there is no other case wherein the power of the Supreme Court to review depends on the amount or value in controversy.
Connections4 off-index
4 references not yet in our index
  • June 25, 1948, ch. 646
  • 62 Stat. 963
  • Feb. 13, 1925, ch. 229, § 9
  • 43 Stat. 941
Citation graph
cites case law
§ 2108
Proof of amount in controversy
ActJune 25, 1948, ch. 646
Stat.62 Stat. 963
ActFeb. 13, 1925, ch. 229, § 9
Stat.43 Stat. 941
Cites 4Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.