No. 6619
Precedential
Processed
Keen v. Carlisle
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., April 4, 1966 185 So. 2d 293; La. Ct. App. 3d Cir., October 13, 1978 363 So. 2d 943; La. Ct. App. 4th Cir., February 13, 1975 308 So. 2d 878
Keen v. Carlisle, 32 La. Ann. 1306 (1880).
Opinion text
This Court has not jurisdiction of this case ratione materice, the ■evidence showing that the amount involved in the principal demand is less than $1000, and that the reconventional demand is plainly fictitious.