Carey v. Russel
This text of 2 Del. 280 (Carey v. Russel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The principle is, that consent may take away error, but cannot confer jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of inferior tribunals must be construed strictly; it is conferred by statute and must be plainly embraced within the terms of the law. There is nothing in the act “ providing for the recovery of small debts,” authorizing the entry of an amicable action before justices of the peace, or authorizing the entry of judgments by them otherwise than in suits commenced according to the forms of that law and tried before them, or before referees of their appointment, or upon judgment notes. The principle of this case was decided in Morrison vs. The Wilmington & Kennet Turnpike Company. 1 Harr. Rep. 366.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Del. 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carey-v-russel-delsuperct-1837.