Feillett v. Engler
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, County of Placer. This was an action of ejectment. The defendant admits all the substantial allegations of the complaint, but claims title by virtue of a purchase at a constable’s sale, upon execution issued by a justice of the peace, against the plaintiff, for the sum of three hundred and eighteen dollars.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, County of Placer. This was an action of ejectment. The defendant admits all the substantial allegations of the complaint, but claims title by virtue of a purchase at a constable’s sale, upon execution issued by a justice of the peace, against the plaintiff, for the sum of three hundred and eighteen dollars. The docket of the justice shows that suit was originally commenced for the sum of two hundred dollars, but that the present plaintiff, then defendant, appeared and confessed judgment for three hundred dollars, whereupon…
1Opinion of the Court
Murray, C. J., after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, J., concurring.
We have repeatedly decided, that justices of the peace cannot entertain suits for money demands, where the amount in controversy exceeds two hundred dollars. Consent of parties cannot give a jurisdiction which the Constitution denies. It makes no difference whether the judgment was suffered voluntarily or not. It was for all purposes absolutely void, and the execution and sale under it a nullity.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
2Cited by8 opinions
- Crislip v. CainWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1882
- Vasquez v. VasquezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Finders v. BodleNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
- Depue v. SergentWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
- Bud Hoard Co. v. F. Berg & Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.