Case ID: unrep-tenn-cas_1/html/0064-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "McKinney, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Archibald Austin v. Sellors.
    CERTIORARI to Justice of the Peace. Reason for not appealing.
    
    An agreement entered into with an infant after the rendition of a justice’s judgment, by which the defendant was defrauded of his right of appeal, held, sufficient to sustain a petition for certiorari.
    This .was a certiorari to a justice of the peace. The reasoa stated in the petition for not appealing was, that the plaintiff agreed after judgment to arbitrate the matter, and thereby prevented the defendant from appealing. It appeared that the plaintiff was an infant, and it was hence insisted that the agreement was void.
    The circuit judge held the reason for not appealing insufficient, and dismissed the petition; whereupon the defendant appealed to this court.
   McKinney, J.:

The agreement of the infant having had the. effect of preventing the other party from taking the appeal, would operate as a fraud upon him, if he were not permitted to avoid the effect of it in this form.

The reason stated for not appealing is sufficient.

Judgment reversed. 
      
       As to what is sufficient cause for certiorari, see Garrett v. Perryman, 2 Tenn. 108; Trigg v. Boyce, 4 Hayw. 100; Perkins v. Hadley, 4 Hayw. 143; Hale v. Landrum, 2 Humph. 32; Smith v. White, 5 Humph. 46; Napier v. Person, 7 Yerg. 300; Belcher v. Belcher, 10 Yerg. 121, 126; Day v. Johnson, 4 Cold, 231; McCormack v. Murfree, 2 Sneed, 46; Allen v. Prim, 2 Swan, 337; Evans v. Evans, 4 Cold. 600; Crouch v. Martin, 4 Sneed, 569; McMurry v. Milan, 2 Swan, 176; Chappell v. Jones, 8 Humph. 107.
      Cause for certiorari insufficient, when, see Henderson v. Luckey, 2 Tenn. 110; Stuart v. Hall, 2 Tenn. 179; Crafts v. Stockton, 8 Yerg. 164; O’Sullivan v. Larry, 2 Head, 64; Moss v. Collins, 3 Humph. 148; Porter v. Wheaton, 5 Yerg. 108; Sharp v. Clouston, 4 Yerg. 193; Newman v. Rogers, 9 Humph. 120; Adair v. Davis, 3 Humph. 137;