State ex rel. Harding v. Moor
This text of 9 Nev. 355 (State ex rel. Harding v. Moor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
By the Court,
The State brought suit in the justice’s court and obtained judgment by default. Defendant appealed to the district court, and was therein allowed to file an answer which [357]*357presented an issue that could not have been tried in the justice’s court. Upon the] trial of the issues thus raised defendant obtained judgment. To set aside this judgment relator made this application for a writ of certiorari, claiming that the district court exceeded its jurisdiction.
In the case of Peacock v. Leonard, this Court decided that a district court on appeal had exactly the same jurisdiction as the justice of the peace, from whose court the appeal is taken. 8 Nev. 84.
As the justice could not have tried this case upon the answer filed in the district court, it follows from the rule announced in Peacock v. Leonard, that the proceedings and judgment in the district court should be annulled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
9 Nev. 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-harding-v-moor-nev-1874.