Woodruff v. Griffith
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Tins’was a proceeding in prohibition, commenced in this court? irr August, 1842. The plaintiff in his declaration, shows the proceedings in a certain suit before a justice of tho peace, in which Griffith was plaintiff, and the Real Estate Bank of the Stale of Arkansas^ was d’efend'ani; from which it appears that said suit was founded on. certain matters of contract, and that the sum in controversy was lesa than $100, that a valid process ©f summons was issued by the…
Read the full summary
Tins’was a proceeding in prohibition, commenced in this court? irr August, 1842. The plaintiff in his declaration, shows the proceedings in a certain suit before a justice of tho peace, in which Griffith was plaintiff, and the Real Estate Bank of the Stale of Arkansas^ was d’efend'ani; from which it appears that said suit was founded on. certain matters of contract, and that the sum in controversy was lesa than $100, that a valid process ©f summons was issued by the justice,, and legally executed upon the bank; that the bank failed to appear and answer said demand, and judgment thereupon was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Ringo, C. J.
The principal question to be decided is this, whether, admitting the truth of the facts- pleaded, the justice of the peace has assumed to himself the exercise of judicial power over a matter or thing not subject to his jurisdiction.
According to the principles held and declared by this court, in its opinion delivered at the present term, in the case of Moore vs. Woodruff, the judgment rendered by the justice in favor of the present defendant against the Real Estate Bank is unquestionably a valid judgment. And the power of the justice to proceed thereupon, by writ of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Davis v. Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf RailroadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Traylor v. AllenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1895