Court Opinion

ID: 5473672
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-09 20:44:50.19979+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:33:24.217486
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam.

Whether the justice was legally disqualified, on the ground that the plaintiff below was his son-in-law, is, perhaps, questionable ; but the gross indecency of an exercise of his judicial power, in such a case, should induce this court to scrutinize his proceedings with a jealous eye.
This suit was brought under the 13th section of the 25 dollar act, (1 R.L. 395.,) which provides a remedy, expressly, (i by action of debt” The objection to the form of action was, therefore, well taken, and the judgment ought to be reversed.
Judgment reversed.