Case Name: Barzillai Brown versus Lewis Watson & al.
Court: Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Maine
Decision Date: 1841-06
Citations: 19 Me. 452
Docket Number: 
Parties: Barzillai Brown versus Lewis Watson & al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maine Reports
Volume: 19
Pages: 452–453

Head Matter:
Barzillai Brown versus Lewis Watson & al.
The certificate of two Justices of the Peace and Quorum, that the creditor has been notified according to law, of the time and place of his debtor’s disclosure, is conclusive upon this point.
It is not essential that the certificate of the justices should be filed with the prison keeper prior to the suit on the bond.
This was an action of debt on a poor debtor’s bond, in the usual form, given by the defendant, Watson. ' The parties agreed to submit the case, upon the following facts, to the Court for their decision.
The defendant, Watson, in this case, applied to a magistrate Instead of the gaoler, who issued a citation to the creditor, which was duly served. At the return day of the execution, the debtor appeared and disclosed. The plaintiff appeared, by his attorney, and proposed certain interrogatories, which were answered. No objection was then taken because the citation issued from a justice instead of the gaoler. The debt- or disclosed no property, except certain choses in action, which the plaintiff’s attorney declined taking.
The debtor was admitted to the oath and received the usual certificate, which was not filed in the gaoler’s office till after the commencement of this suit.
J. A. Poor, for the plaintiff,
referred to Stat. 1835, c. 19, § 9; Knight v. Norton, 327 ; Putnam v. Longley, 11 Pick. 487 ; Slasson v. Broad, 20 Pick. 486; Sturgis v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122.
Blake, for the defendants,
cited Thayer v. Seavey, 2 Fairf. 290; Kendrick v. Gregory, 9 Greenl. 22 ; Black v. Bollard, 13 Maine R. 239.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Weston C. J.
Two justices of the peace and of the quorum, to whom jurisdiction of the subject matter belonged, having found and certified, that the creditor had been duly notified according to law, their certificate is conclusive upon this point, as was decided by this Court in Churchill v. Balch, 17 Maine R. 411, where the proper distinction was pointed out between that case and Knight v. Norton & al. 15 Maine R. 337. It was not essential to the defence, that the certificate of the justices should be filed with the prison keeper, prior to the suit. Kendrick v. Gregory & al. 9 Greenl. 22.
Judgment for the defendants.