Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Horton v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company…

We agree with petitioner that determination of the value of the matter in controversy for purposes of federal jurisdiction is a federal question to be decided under federal standards, [10] although the federal courts must, of course, look to state law to determine the nature and extent of the right to be enforced in a diversity case. It therefore is not controlling here that Texas has held that the crucial factor for allocating its cases among different state courts on an amount-in-controversy basis is the amount originally claimed before its State Compensation Board.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Horton v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company…

Congress could very easily have used language to bar filing of workmen's compensation suits by the insurer as well as removal of such suits, and it could easily do so still. We therefore hold that under the present law the District Court has jurisdiction to try this civil case between citizens of different States if the matter in controversy is in excess of $10,000.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Horton v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company…

The complaint of the respondent company filed in the District Court, while denying any liability at all and asking that the award of $1,050 against it be set aside, also alleges that petitioner Horton has claimed, now claims and will claim that he has suffered total and permanent disability and is entitled to a maximum recovery of $14,035, which, of course, is in excess of the $10,000 requisite to give a federal court jurisdiction of this controversy.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature