Court Opinion

ID: 9830076
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:51:10.720157+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:12.102274
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
It is insisted in the motion that, because article 1903, V. S. C. S., wMch prescribes the requisites of a plea of privilege and governs the practice when such plea is filed, has been held applicable to both justice courts and courts of record, we should hold article 2308, prescribing venue of suits in the justice court, applicable to suits in courts of record. This contention must be overruled. The practice in justice courts is governed by title 41, V. S. O. S., and article 2400 of chapter 18, said title, provides that—
“Whenever the mode of proceeding in any particular case or matter is not prescribed by the provisions of tliis title, or of some other law or title specially relating thereto, the same shall be governed by the provisions of the title relating to the mode of proceeding in the district and county courts in civil cases, in so far as the same are applicable.”
 In matters relating to procedure and practice title 41 is not as comprehensive as ⅝ title 37, governing procedure and practice in courts of record, and this accounts for the enactment of article 2400. No such provision is found in title 37. Where any matter of practice and procedure is prescribed in the title governing such matters in the justice court, it is exclusive, and can be applied only in such courts. Article 2308 relates exclusively to practice in justice courts, while article 1830 relates to venue in courts of record. Should any question arise in the justice court with reference to venue which is not covered by article 2308, it is the duty of the court to be governed by any provision of article 1830 applicable thereto; but the reverse of tMs proposition is not true.
The motion is overruled.