Legal Opinion

Rice v. Milks

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1849Published

Milks sued Rice and Thorp in a justice’s court, and recovered a judgment against them, in a plea of trespass de bonis asportatis. The defence set up was, that Thorp, being an overseer of the highway, had warned Milks to work on the road. He neglected to appear, and Thorp made complaint to Rice, who was a justice of the peace. The latter issued a summons requiring Milks to appear and show cause why he should not be fined according to law.

Read the full summary

Milks sued Rice and Thorp in a justice’s court, and recovered a judgment against them, in a plea of trespass de bonis asportatis. The defence set up was, that Thorp, being an overseer of the highway, had warned Milks to work on the road. He neglected to appear, and Thorp made complaint to Rice, who was a justice of the peace. The latter issued a summons requiring Milks to appear and show cause why he should not be fined according to law. Upon the return of the summons Rice imposed a fine on Milks, and issued a warrant for its collection. Under this warrant the property of Milks was seized and…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Sill, J.

This case involves a construction of the following section of the revised statutes, as amended in 1846. “If after the election of any person as a justice of the peace, he shall become an inn-holder or tavern-keeper, in fact, he shall not have any power or jurisdiction under the provisions of this title ; but he may issue execution upon any judgment actually rendered by him before he became so disqualified. (Rev. Stat. part 3, chap. 2, tit. 4, § 6.) The supreme court decided that if a person elected as a justice was a tavern-keeper at the time of his election, this…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bennett v. WardNew York Supreme Court · 1805
  2. Bouton v. NeilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1808

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API