Case ID: port_5/html/0213-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HARRISON VS DANELLY.
    
      Of cases taken by appeal from magistrates’ Courts.
    
    
      1. Cases removed into the Circuit Court by appeal from a justice of the peace, should be tried ele novo, according to the requirements of the statute of 1819.
    
    On a writ of error to the Circuit Court of Cov-ington county.
    James Harrison sued out a summons from before a justice of the peace of Covington county, on a claim of debt against Danelly, founded upon the note of the latter, for forty dollars. The justice having given judgment against Danelly, he took an appeal to the Circuit Court.-
    The record brought up to this Court, showed, that the proceedings were quashed on motion, by the Circuit Court, (supposed,) for some irregularity in the' warrant or other proceedings, before the justice.
    
      Porter for the plaintiff in error.
    
      
       Aikins Dig. 261. §12.
    
   PER CURIAM.

Upon an appeal of the defendant from a judgment of a justice of the peace, in favor of the plaintiff, the proceedings which had been had before the justice, were removed into the Circuit Court of Covington county, and there, on the motion of the defendant, quashed. No counsel has appeared here to direct our attention to any supposed defect. We have examined the record, and think there^ is no defect which is not cured ’by the thirty-eighth section of the act of eightéen hundred and nineteen.

This opinion applies to six other cases in this Court, between the same parties. Each of the cases ought to have been tried de novo in the Circuit Court, as the act of eighteen hundred and nineteen directs.

The judgment in each caséis reversed, and each cause is remanded. 
      
       Aik. Dig. 261.