St. Clair County IL Archives Court.....Clark, V Cornelius 1819-31
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarch.org/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarch.org/il/ilfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Deb Haines http://www.genrecords.net/emailregistry/vols/00003.html#0000719 May 28, 2008, 3:35 am

Source: Reports Of Cases Illinois
Written: 1819-31

December Term 1822, Vandalia.

Isaac Clark, Appellant, v. Joseph Cornelius, Appellee.

Appeal from St. Clair.

A justice of the peace has no power to investigate an account exceeding $100, 
though it may be reduced by credits to a sum less than $100.

Clark exhibited to a justice of the peace for St. Clair county, an account 
amounting, in all the items, to $176, against Cornelius, on which account 
there was given a credit of $77, leaving a balance due of $99. The justice 
gave judgment in favor of Clark, from which Cornelius appealed to the circuit 
court. The circuit court decided, that the justice of the peace had no 
jurisdiction, and dismissed the suit; from which decision Clark appealed, and 
assigned that decision as error.

Opinion of the Court by Justice John Reynolds. The act defining the duties of 
justices of the peace, gives the justices jurisdiction in all cases of 
contract for the payment of money, where the sum demanded does not exceed one 
hundred dollars.*

Under this act, a justice has no power to investigate any account or other 
claim, exceeding one hundred dollars. When the credit is applied to the claim 
exhibited, it reduces it below one hundred dollars, yet the justice would have 
to investigate the whole amount of $176, as the credit was not applied to any 
particular item or charge in the account, so as to extinguish it. This power, 
the legislature never intended to give justices of the peace. We are of 
opinion that the circuit court decided correctly that the justice had no 
jurisdiction, and we, therefore, affirm the judgment. (1)

Judgment affirmed.

------------------
*Laws of 1819, page 185.

(1) This decision was followed and approved in the following cases. Maurer v. 
Derrick, post. Ellis v. Snider, id. _lue v. Weir et al., id. But this is now 
changed by statute. The provisions of the statute giving jurisdiction to 
justices of the peace, now in force, are as follows:

"Justices of the peace shall have jurisdiction in their respective counties, 
to bear and determine all complaints, suits and prosecutions of the following 
description:

"In actions of debt on bonds, contracts, agreements, promissory notes, or 
other instruments in writing, in which the amount claimed to be due does not 
exceed one hundred dollars.

"In actions of assumpsit upon any contract or promise, verbal or written, 
express or implied, for a valuable consideration, in which the amount claimed 
to be due does not exceed one hundred dollars.

"In suits for money claimed to be due upon unsettled accounts, in which the 
balance claimed to be due does not, exceed one hundred dollars." Scates' 
Comp., page 686. Purple's Statutes, page 662. There are also other provisions 
giving jurisdiction to justices, but these are the principal ones which relate 
to the decision in question.

Additional Comments:
Reports of Cases at Common Law and in Chancery, Argued and Determined in the 
Supreme Court of the State of Illinois, From its First Organization in 1819, 
to the End of December Term, 1831. By Sidney Breese, Counsellor at Law. Second 
Edition, with Additional Notes, By Edwin Beecher. Chicago: Callaghan & 
Company, 1877.

File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/il/stclair/court/clark207gwl.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.genrecords.org/ilfiles/

File size: 3.8 Kb