Sutherland v. Sweem
JOHN SUTHERLAND, Sr., and THOMAS R. DEAN v. J. B. SWEEM
- Area
- civil
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
By the Court :
The Court below erred in admitting in evidence, against the plaintiff’s objection, the record of the proceedings in the Justice’s Court. In Young v. Wright, 52 Cal. 407, we held that so ■much of the Act of February 4th, 1874, (Stats. 1873-4, p. 50) as attempts to confer upon Justices’ Courts jurisdiction in the class of cases provided for in that act, is unconstitutional and void. The proceedings in the Justice’s Court were therefore null and void, and were not admissible in evidence for any purpose.
Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.
Cites, in this corpus
- Young v. Wright No. 5347 · 1877-07-01