Gober v. Phillips

117 So. 600, 151 Miss. 255, 1928 Miss. LEXIS 304
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedJune 11, 1928
DocketNo. 27227.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 117 So. 600 (Gober v. Phillips) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gober v. Phillips, 117 So. 600, 151 Miss. 255, 1928 Miss. LEXIS 304 (Mich. 1928).

Opinion

Cook, J.

The appellee, Logan Phillips, a copartnership composed of W. H. Phillips and Cowan Dixon, instituted suit in the court of J. IT. Penix, police justice and ex officio justice of the peace in and for the city of Jackson, in Hinds county, Miss., upon a promissory note executed by the appellants. A plea to the jurisdiction of the court was filed and was overruled, and no further defense being offered, a judgment was entered in favor of the appellee for the amount sued for. From this judgment, an appeal was prosecuted to-the county court, and there, a demurrer to the plea to the jurisdiction was sustained, and a judgment was entered against the appellants. On appeal to the circuit court, the judgment of the county court was affirmed, and from the judgment of the circuit court this appeal was prosecuted.

Hpon the hearing of the plea to the jurisdiction and . the demurrer thereto, counsel for the respective parties entered into an agreement as to the facts, from which it appears that the city of Jackson, Miss., has a population in excess of seven thousand, and since January, 1913, has been operating under .what,is known as the commis'sion form of government, as provided by chapter 120', Laws of 1912, and.amendments thereto; that the city of Jackson lies partly in supervisor’s district No. 1 and *262 partly in supervisor’s district No. 5, the dividing or district line being Capitol street in said city; that J. H. Penix was elected police justice of said city by the mayor and commissioners, and was actively engaged in the discharge of the duties of the office', although he had executed no bond either as police justice or ex officio justice of the peace; that said J. HI Penix resides within the corporate limits of the city, but in supervisor’s district No. 1; that he holds his court in the Municipal Building of the said city, which is located in supervisor’s district No. 5; that the defendants both reside within the corporate limits of said city, but in supervisor’s district No. ,5'; and that the said J. H. Penis acted, in the case at bar, as ex officio justice of the peace.

It was further agreed that on January 21, 1913, the mayor and commissioners of the said city of Jackson adopted the following ordinances creating a police court and the office of police justice:

“Police Court Created.
“675. There is hereby created a police court of the city of Jackson, which shall be presided over by the police justice. All state laws and city ordinances now in existence and not inconsistent with chapter 120 of the Laws of Mississippi of 1912, relating to said court, shall govern the same.”
“Police Justice, Office Created, Duties.
“676. There is hereby, created the office of police justice of the city of Jackson, who shall be elected by the council at the same time as all other officers, and who shall perform all the duties now required of the police justice by state laws and city ordinances, not inconsistent with chapter 120' of the Laws of Mississippi of 1912.”

By their plea to the jurisdiction of the court, the appellants also sought to challenge the election and qualification of J. H. Penix, and his right to hold the office of police justice and ex officio justice of the peace; but, on *263 appeal, it is conceded that the title to the office cannot thus be raised and adjudicated in this proceeding’, and the only question for decision is whether or not, under the facts above stated, J. PI. Penix, the acting police justice and ex officio justice of the peace in and for the city of ffackson, had jurisdiction of this cause.

Section 170 of the Constitution of 1890 provides, that “each county shall be divided into five districts,” while section 171 provides that “a competent number of justices of the peace and constables shall be chosen in each county in the manner provided by law, for each district, who shall hold their office for the term of four years, ’ ’ and “no person shall be eligible to the office of the justice of the peace who shall not have resided two years in the district next preceding his selection.” The appellants contend that in the trial of this cause, Penix was acting as a justice of the peace within the purview and terms of these provisions, and that since he resided in supervisor’s district No. 1, he was without jurisdiction in district No. 5, where the court was held and where the appellants resided. This contention of appellants must be sustained if they are correct in the view that the police court and the office of police justice and ex officio justice of the peace in municipalities are created under the provision of section 171 of the Constitution. We do not think, however, that in creating the police court, and conferring upon police justices the same jurisdiction as given to justices of the peace, the legislature was attempting to create additional justice of the peace districts with jurisdiction limited to the territorial limits of the municipality, but that it was exercising the authority conferred upon it by section 172. of the Constitution to, “from time to time, establish such other inferior courts as may be necessary, and abolish the same whenever deemed expedient.”

Section 172 of the Constitution of 1890 is in the same language as section 24 of article 6 of the Constitution of *264 186®, and in discussing the power of the legislature to establish á police court and to confer on the mayor of a municipality or a police justice the same jurisdiction as is conferred on justices of the peace, the court, in Bell v. McKinney, 63 Miss. 187, said:

“Under article 1, section 31, and article 6, section 24, of the Constitution, which provides, that the legislature may establish in addition to the courts designated in the Constitution other inferior courts, and in cases of the misdemeanors therein ^enumerated may dispense with the inquest of a grand jury and authorize prosecutions before justices of the peace or such other inferior courts as may be so established, it is competent for the legislature to invest the mayor of an incorporated town with the criminal jurisdiction of a justice of the peace, or to declare that the mayor of such town shall be eos officio a justice of the peace in the corporate limits of the town in which he was elected. A mayor’s court thus constituted would be an inferior court within the meaning’; of the constitutional provisions above referred to.”

Section 3001, Code of 1892 (section 3399, Code 1906; section 6943, Hemingway’s 1927 Code), provided that the mayor and board of aldermen of cities of certain specified population were authorized to elect a police justice; and in municipalities where no police justice was elected, that the mayor should be the police justice.; and that in either case the police justice should be eos officio a justice of the peace in and for the corporate limits of the municipality. In the case of Hughes v. State, 79 Miss. 77, 29 So.

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

Related

Drummond v. State
185 So. 207 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1938)
Independent Paving Co. v. City of Bay St. Louis
74 F.2d 961 (Fifth Circuit, 1935)
Buck v. State
121 So. 147 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
117 So. 600, 151 Miss. 255, 1928 Miss. LEXIS 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gober-v-phillips-miss-1928.