Case ID: h-j_1/html/0207-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GENERAL COURT,
    OCTOBER TERM, 1801.
    Bruner vs. Hedges.
    The county count has jurisdiction in an action assumption for not delivering a sufficient quantity of superfine flour produced from the plaintiff's wheat sent to be ground at the defendants mill, although the damages recovered were less than lot.
    Arread from Frederick County Court, from a iudg- * . ° inent rendered in that court in favour of the plaintiff, now appellee. It was an action of assumpsit, and the declaration stated, that the plaintiff, Hedges, “delivered to the defendant in 1797 and 1798, 313 bushels of wheat, for which he received 54 barrels of superfine flour, and 2 barrels of common, only, whereas he ought to have received 63 barrels.” &c. By agreement of counsel no advantage was to be taken to the informality of the declaration, and all errors therein, were released. The general issue was pleaded, and there was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for Si. 16s. 0d. current money, damages, and costs, from which judgment the defendant appealed to this court,
    
      Shaaff, for the appellant,
    contended, that the judgment ought to be reversed, being entered for a sum not within the jurisdiction of the county court, and he read the act of November session 1791, cti. 68, s. 9, directing that the county courts should not hold plea of any debt, &c. (within the jurisdiction given to justices of the peace,) which should not exceed ¿10 or 1000 lbs. of tobacco; and that this case came within the 10th section of that act, which gives jurisdiction to the justices of the peace in cases of debts, or sums of money or tobacco due on contract, and of damages for the nondelivery of grain, or other articles, con-traded to be delivered.
    
      J. Dorsey, on the same side.
    
      Mason and Nelson, for the Appellee.
   The Generad Couet affirmed the judgment of the County Court, and the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeals, where the judgment of the General Court was affirmed at November term 1803.