Warner v. Shed

10 Johns. 138
New York Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1813·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The warrant stated that the plaintiff and another had been convicted at a court of special sessions, for an assault and battery, and it mentioned the three justices before whom the plaintiff had been brought. Three justices have jurisdiction, in certain cases, of breaches of the peace, and have power to fine and imprison for the same. They had jurisdiction. [142]*142therefore, of the subject matter, and that was enough to jnstif~ the constable in serving the mitt~'inus, fQr he was nqt bound t~ examine mtp the validity of the pr9ce~dings and of the process. It was sufficient for hini that three justices had jurisdiction to try, convict and imprison for an assault and battery. (Hill v. Bateman, Stra. 710. case of the Marshalsea, 10 Co. 76. a.)

Whether the conviction was erroneous was not material to him, The warrant being under seal, and coming- from three justices having power in the case, it formed a complete justification. The verdict ought, therefore, to be set aside, with costs tp abide the. event of the suit.

New trial granted.

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

Warner v. Shed, 10 Johns. 138 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1813).

10 Johns. 138 (Warner v. Shed) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Walmart Stores East, Lp v. Leverette
321 Ga. 854 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2025)
United States ex rel. Hendricks v. Harris
26 F. Cas. 177 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina, 1872)
Campbell v. Webb
11 Md. 471 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1857)
Woods v. Davis
34 N.H. 328 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1857)
Sprague v. Birchard
1 Wis. 457 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1853)
State v. Weed
21 N.H. 262 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1850)
Camp v. Moseley
2 Fla. 171 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1848)
Barrett v. Crane
16 Vt. 246 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1844)