Reddington v. Hamilton
This text of 8 Blackf. 62 (Reddington v. Hamilton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The board of commissioners of Decatur county ordered and adjudged that a certain road should be changed. An appeal was taken to the Circuit Court, which also made the same order, and gave judgment against the appellant (who ‘objected in both Courts against the change) for costs.
The Circuit Court tried the cause upon a transcript of the record of the proceedings of the board of commissioners.
This was erroneous. We have heretofore decided that a Circuit Court is to try an appeal from an order of the of county commissioners de novo, as a Court of original jurisdiction, and not as a Court of errors; and that to give it jurisdiction in a cause like this, it is necessary that the original petition for the change of a road, and the original report of the commissioners, appointed upon such petition to view the road proposed to be changed, should be before it. Beeler v. Hantsch, 5 Blackf. 594. In this cause such was not the fact. The petition is not set out even in the transcript of the record of the proceedings of the board of commissioners, though the report is.
The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Blackf. 62, 1846 Ind. LEXIS 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reddington-v-hamilton-ind-1846.