Dunham v. Chamberlain

9 Johns. 224
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1812
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 9 Johns. 224 (Dunham v. Chamberlain) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dunham v. Chamberlain, 9 Johns. 224 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1812).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A justice’s court has no jurisdiction of matters of account, “ where the sum total of the accounts of both parties shall, in the whole, amount to 200 dollars.” Here the accounts of both parties, proved to the satisfaction of the referees, exceeded, in the whole, 200 dollars. It was, therefore, clearly a case in which a justice had no jurisdiction, and the plaintiff was obliged to sue in the common pleas. And in all suits in the common pleas, where “ the accounts between the parties exceed 200 dollars, to be certified, &c. if by reason of payment, or discount, the plaintiff shall recover less than 25 dolars, he shall recover costs,” &c(Laws N. Y. v. 1. p. 530.) The certificate of the referees was, here, a substitute for the certificate of the judge, upon the trial, and the plaintiff is entitled to costs.

Judgment for the plaintiff

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Sowles
16 F. 536 (D. Vermont, 1883)
Elliott v. . Smitherman
19 N.C. 338 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1837)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Johns. 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunham-v-chamberlain-nysupct-1812.