Frees v. . Ford

6 N.Y. 176
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 5, 1852
StatusPublished
Cited by53 cases

This text of 6 N.Y. 176 (Frees v. . Ford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Frees v. . Ford, 6 N.Y. 176 (N.Y. 1852).

Opinion

* Johnson, J.

— There is a ground on which this -* judgment ought to be reversed, leaving untouched the question of the constitutionality of the judiciary act, so far as it relates to the jurisdiction of the . county, courts. We ought not. to pass upon the ^ ^question - of. the constitutionality. of-.a statute, unless the determination of the point is' necessary to the determination of the cause. Indeed, we cannot, if we would, so pass upon it, as to render our decision efficient as authority, when there is another and clear ground on which our judgment may be supported.

The 30th section of the judiciary act provides, that the county courts- shall have jurisdiction “to hear, try and determine, according to law, the following actions, when all of the defendants, at the time of commencing the action, reside in the county in which said court is held; actions of debt, assumpsit and covenant, when the debt or damages claimed shall not exceed two thousand dollars,” &c. This county court is not a court of-general jurisdiction, as was the old court of common -pleas;-on the contrary,- it is a new court, with & limited, statutory jurisdiction, To all such courts- the-rule universally applies, that their jurisdiction must appear upon the record. (Turner v. Bank of North America, 4 Dall. 8.) In this cáse, it does not appear upon the record, that the defendant was, at the time the suit was commenced, a resident of the county of Columbia; This being a jurisdictional fact, and- not averred upon the record, the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Welles ánd Edmonds, JJ., dissented.

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

Related

People ex rel. Dold v. Martin
284 A.D. 127 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1954)
Martens v. Fernandez
196 Misc. 723 (New York County Courts, 1949)
People ex rel. Albanese v. Hunt
177 Misc. 151 (New York Supreme Court, 1941)
Majestic Tile Co. v. Nicholls
161 Misc. 231 (New York County Courts, 1936)
Rosenblum v. Higgins
240 A.D. 131 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1934)
Berger v. Quinn
149 Misc. 545 (New York Supreme Court, 1933)
Yager v. Yager
125 Misc. 773 (New York County Courts, 1925)
People ex rel. Rayland Realty Co. v. Fagan
194 A.D. 185 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)
Edward Todd & Co. v. Southern Pacific Co.
150 N.Y.S. 979 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1915)
Maltin v. Royal Petticoat Co.
147 N.Y.S. 545 (New York County Courts, 1914)
People Ex Rel. Wogan v. . Rafferty
102 N.E. 582 (New York Court of Appeals, 1913)
People ex rel. Wogan v. Rafferty
154 A.D. 767 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)
People ex rel. Wogan v. Rafferty
77 Misc. 258 (New York Supreme Court, 1912)
Matter of Baker
65 N.E. 1100 (New York Court of Appeals, 1903)
In re the Final Accounting of Hayes
37 Misc. 264 (New York Supreme Court, 1902)
Dodge v. . Cornelius
61 N.E. 244 (New York Court of Appeals, 1901)
Meuthen v. Eyelis
33 Misc. 98 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
In re Scharmann
49 A.D. 278 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
Ross v. Ingersoll
53 A.D. 86 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
People ex rel. Usoy v. Waring
52 A.D. 36 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 N.Y. 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frees-v-ford-ny-1852.