McFarland v. McLaughlin
David McFarland v. Thomas McLaughlin
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Aikens J.
delivered the opinion of the Court.
A joinder of distinct causes of action, which might be joined at common law, is no where forbidden by our statute. It is the matter in demand or cause of action, which determines the jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace, over the action or suit itself. (St. 15 Nov. 1821, Sec. 1.) It is only from the action or suit originally made cognizable before a Justice of the Peace, that the jurisdiction of the County Court is taken away. ( 2 Stat. 101 .)
From a recurrence to the matters in demand, which are legally joined in this suit, it appears that a Justice of the Peace had not jurisdiction of the action. The County Court therefore had jurisdiction of the action. The principle settled in the case Keys v. Weed. 1 D. Chip. Rep. 379 governs this case.
Judgment that the action do not abate.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.