Case Name: Daniel W. Vaughan v. Sabin Allen
Court: Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Jurisdiction: Rhode Island
Decision Date: 1855-03
Citations: 3 R.I. 122
Docket Number: 
Parties: Daniel W. Vaughan v. Sabin Allen.
Judges: 
Reporter: Rhode Island Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 122–123

Head Matter:
Daniel W. Vaughan v. Sabin Allen.
This Court has no jurisdiction oyer a petition for a new trial of a case fully tried in a Special Court of Common Pleas.
This was a petition, for a -new trial of an action commenced by Sabin Allen, an auctioneer of the town of Cumberland, against the petitioner, at a Special Court of Common Pleas, on tbe 15th. day of December 1854, to recover the price of a lot of land, sold at auction by the plaintiff to the defendant. The defendant resisted the claim, on the ground that the owner of the land sold could not make him a good title to the premises sold. After a full trial, said Special Court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the amount of the claim, with interest and costs. There being no appeal from the decisions of Special Courts, the defendant filed a petition for a new trial, alleging error in law and fact in the proceedings.
The respondent, Allen, moved to dismiss the petition, on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction to grant a petition of this nature, after a trial before a Special Court of Common Pleas, and referred to Dig. of 1844, p. 90.
T. A. JencJces for petitioner.
Bradley for; respondent.

Opinion:
Staples, C. J.
— The power of the Court to grant new trials in any cases, is derived from the statute. Sec. 4 of an act in relation to the Supreme Court, confers the power and defines the cases in which it is to be exercised. After conferring power to grant trials and new trials in eases decided in the Supreme Court and Courts of Common Pleas, it goes on to say, that the " said Court shall ;and may exercise the same powers in granting a trial in all cases decided at a Special Court of Common Pleas or before any justice of the peace, if no trial shall have been -had thereon."
There having been a full trial before the Special Court in this case, this Court has no jurisdiction over the petition, which must therefore be dismissed.