Case ID: miss_59/html/0015-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Campbell, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

E. Richardson v. I. Davis.
    1. Replevin. Venue.
    
    A writ of replevin issued by a justice of the peace, returnable before a justice of another district in which the property is held by the defendant, confers no jurisdiction on the magistrate before whom it is returned. Code 1880, § 2634.
    
      2. Replevin. Appeal.
    
    If replevin is begun by making and filing the affidavit before a magistrate not having jurisdiction thereof, the writ which he issues should be dismissed on appeal by the Circuit Court. Code 1880, § 2354.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Washington County.
    Hon. B. F. Trimble, Judge.
    A magistrate of Washington County, before whom 'the appellant made affidavit, issued a writ of replevin returnable before another justice of the peace of the same county, but a different district, in which the appellee resided and held the property in his possession. From a general judgment by the latter justice for the defendant, who had bonded the property, the plaintiff appealed to the Circuit Court, where, on motion, the suit was dismissed.
    
      Nugent $ Mo Willie, for the appellant.
    The magistrate, who tried the case, had jurisdiction of the property which was in his district and of the defendant who resided there. Issuance of the writ by another justice does not involve jurisdiction over the subject-matter, but is an irregularity which will not be noticed after trial. Code 1880, § 1727 ; Peters v. Finney, 12 S. & M. 449 ; Marx v. Trussell, 50 Miss. 498. Similar objections to an attachment writ were so determined in the case of Baldwin v. Flash, 58 Miss. 593. The doctrine of the case of Cross v. Levy, 57 Miss. 634, should be applied, for the appellee had a fair trial, and, when the officer held the property and the defendant appeared, the writ had performed its function. Poland v. Sprague, 12 Peters, 300; Cooper v. Reynolds, 10 Wall. 308; Drake on Attachment, §§ 87, 87 h, 185. Jurisdiction to issue process, under Code 1880, § 2191, is co-extensive with the county, but the trial is limited to the district where the defendant resides or the property is found.
    No counsel for the appellee.
   Campbell, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The venue of the action of replevin is regulated by § 2634 of the Code of 1880. The action may be instituted in the Circuit Court of any county or the Justice’s Court of any district in which the defendant or one of several, or the goods and chattels of some of them, may be found. The action is instituted by making and filing the required affidavit. The writ is to be issued by the officer with whom the affidavit is filed. There is no authority in the statute for a justice of the peace’ of one district to issue a writ of replevin for property held in possession by a defendant in another district returnable before a justice of the peace in such district, and such writ is void and confers no jurisdiction on the justice before whom it is returned.

This action was instituted before a justice of the peace who had no jurisdiction of the ease, and the writ was properly dismissed by the Circuit-Court. Code 1880, § 2354.

Affirmed.