TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Larocque v. Harvey

Larocque v. Harvey, 10 N.Y.S. 576 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1890)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
July 7, 1890
Judges
Landon
Citations
10 N.Y.S. 57664 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 36632 N.Y. St. Rep. 41557 Hun 3661890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 864
Headnotes
L -Justices of the Peace—Jurisdiction. Under Code Civil Prop. IT. Y. § 2861, providing that a justice of the peace has only the civil jurisdiction given him by statute, a justice has no jurisdiction of the person of defendant in an action brought in violation of Code Civil Proc. IT. Y. § 2869, providing that an action must be brought before a justice of a town or city wherein one of the parties resides, or a justice of an adjoining town or city in the same county. S. Appeal from Inferior Courts—Practice. On appeal from the judgment of a justice in such case, affidavits of defendant, showing the residence of the parties, are competent, under Code Civil Proc. § 8057, providing that, upon appeal, errors in fact not affecting the merits of the action, and not within the knowledge of the justice, may be determined upon affidavits.
Summary
Appeal from Franklin county court. Action by Joseph Larocque against Willis C. Harvey. A judgment of a justice of the peace in favor of plaintiff was affirmed by the county court, and defendant appeals. The defendant did not appear before the justice upon the return-day of the summons. The justice of the peace resided, and had his office, in the town of Malone, and the summons was returnable there. Both the plaintiff and the defendants were at the time residents of the town of Waverly, in Franklin county. The town of Waverly does not adjoin the town of Malone. These facts appear upon the affidavit of the defendant, served in connection with his notice of appeal, and are not disputed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Landon

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Landon, J.

The justice of the peace had no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant. Houghtaling v. Groesbeck, 51 N. Y. 673 . Section 2869, Code Civil Proc., provides: “An action must be brought before a justice of a town or city wherein one of the parties resides, or a justice of an adjoining town or city in the same county.” There are certain exceptions, not material here. A justice of the peace has the civil jurisdiction given him by statute, and no other. Section 2861. Upon appeal, errors in fact not affecting the merits, and not within the knowledge of the justice, may be determined upon affidavits. Section 3057. The affidavit of defendant, showing the residence of the parties, was therefore competent, and properly received. Griffin v. Norton, 5 N. Y. St. Rep. 812; Vallen v. McGuire, 2 N. Y. Supp. 381 . The plaintiff cites section 3064. That section is applicable to a defendant in default who seeks to open it. In such case, he appeals to the discretion and favor of the court. Here the defendant asks no favor. He denies the jurisdiction of the justice. If the facts deprived the justice of jurisdiction, it was the defendant’s right to show them. In Hoffman v. Barton, 14 N. Y. St. Rep. 506, cited by plaintiff, it does not appear that such facts were shown. The fact that the defendant did not appear in response to a summons which the justice had no jurisdiction to issue, was no waiver of his right to his subsequent objection to an unauthorized judgment. Judgment reversed, with costs. All concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1895: 21898: 21904: 11906: 118952026peak 1895 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Warring v. Keeler33 N.Y.S. 415 (1895)
  2. People ex rel. Ballin v. Smith76 N.E. 925 (N.Y. 1906)
  3. Dodd v. Ecker24 A.D. 613 (1898)
  4. Monroe v. White25 A.D. 292 (1898)
  5. Sammis v. Nassau Light & Power Co.91 A.D. 7 (1904)
  6. Warring v. Keeler67 N.Y. St. Rep. 417 (1895)

Most recent

  1. People ex rel. Ballin v. Smith76 N.E. 925 (N.Y. 1906)
  2. Sammis v. Nassau Light & Power Co.91 A.D. 7 (1904)
  3. Monroe v. White25 A.D. 292 (1898)
  4. Dodd v. Ecker24 A.D. 613 (1898)
  5. Warring v. Keeler33 N.Y.S. 415 (1895)
  6. Warring v. Keeler67 N.Y. St. Rep. 417 (1895)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Vallen v. McGuire, 2 N.Y.S. 381 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1888) 6
Houghtaling v. Groesbeck, 51 N.Y. 673 (1873) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list