Title: PAHMEYER v. JACKSON.
Citation: 152 Okla. 48, 1931 OK 473, 3 P.2d 657
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: July 21, 1931

PAHMEYER v. JACKSON. Annotate this Case PAHMEYER v. JACKSON. 1931 OK 473 3 P.2d 657 152 Okla. 48 Case Number: 20284 Decided: 07/21/1931 Supreme Court of Oklahoma PAHMEYER v. JACKSON. Syllabus ¶0 Justices of the Peace--Lack of Jurisdiction Where Affidavit in Replevin Fixes Value of Property in Excess of $ 200. A justice of the peace has no jurisdiction in an action in replevin where the value of the property sought to be replevined, as fixed by the affidavit, exceeds $ 200. Appeal from Court of Common Pleas, Tulsa County; William N. Randolph, Judge. Action by Tom Jackson against C. C. Pahmeyer. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed. F. E. Riddle and Chas. L. Harris, for plaintiff in error. Paul D. Busby, for defendant in error. HEFNER, J. ¶1 This is an action in replevin originally brought by Tom Jackson, in a justice of the peace court of the city of Tulsa, against C. C. Pahmeyer to recover trade fixtures of various kinds. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff. Defendant appealed to the court of common pleas, where the judgment was also rendered in plaintiff's favor. ¶2 It appears that defendant originally owned the property in controversy. He executed a deed of trust thereon to secure various creditors, including plaintiff. The property was sold under the deed of trust, and plaintiff became the purchaser. On refusal of the defendant to deliver possession, this action was brought. ¶3 Defendant contends that the judgment should be reversed because the justice of the peace, as well as the court of common pleas, was without jurisdiction. We think this contention must be sustained. ¶4 Section 949, C. O. S. 1921, provides: "The affidavit of the plaintiff, as to the value of the property, shall fix the jurisdiction of the justice so far as such value is concerned; but the value of the property shall not be assessed against the defendant at a greater amount than that sworn to by the plaintiff in his affidavit." ¶5 Plaintiff, in his affidavit of replevin, separately valued each article, and the aggregate value thereof totaled the sum of $ 500. ¶6 On the trial of the case in the justice court, an attempt was made to amend the affidavit so as to bring the amount within the jurisdiction of that court. Without passing on the validity of the amendment in the manner in which it was made, we do not think the amendment was sufficient to give the court jurisdiction. Since each article was separately valued in the affidavit and the aggregate value thereof exceeded the sum of $ 200, the justice of the peace was without jurisdiction. ¶7 This being true, the court of common pleas could not, by appeal, acquire jurisdiction.