Martin v. M'Murphy
Opinion
The only ground for the prohibition in this case, was the want of a written lease. The magistrates, in answer to the rule to show cause, merely certified their proceedings, and require the court to determine the question, upon a view of these proceedings. They do not shew that there was any written lease, nor was it even pretended. Indeed, the return was a tacit acknowledgment, that the allegation in the suggestion was true. The prohibítion, therefore, was properly granted; for magistrates have no such jurisdiction, except where there is a written lease. The motion must, therefore, be rejected.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
5 S.C.L. 555 (Martin v. M'Murphy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.