Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

22 Ind. 115

Palmer v. Fuller

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1864

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1864-05-15

<p>Appeal—Costs.—An administrator who is sued before a justice of the peace on a claim against him in his fiduciary capacity, has a right, under ■§ 64, 2 &. & H. p. 593, to appeal from the judgment rendered, though the justice had no jurisdiction of the cause; and the Court to which he appeals, in deciding the question of jurisdiction in his favor, should render judgment against the plaintiff for costs.</p>

Relies on Dixon v. Hill

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1864-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 1918

5 state decisions

20186418701880189019001910decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Davison, J.

¶1The appellee, as executrix of Henry Fuller, deceased, sued the appellant, as administrator of Andrew Palmer, deceased, before a justice of the peace, upon the following account, which was filed as the cause of action, viz:

¶2Josiah Palmer, administrator of Andrew Palmer, deceased, to Catherine Fuller, executrix of Henry Fuller, deceased, Dr.

¶3February 3,1857, to making rails........................... $7 75

¶4Six years interest.................................................., 2 77

¶5$10 52

¶6The justice gave judgment in favor of the executrix, who was the plaintiff, for 7 dollars and 75 cents, and the defend*116ant appealed. In the Circuit Court, to which the appeal waa taken, “the Court ordered the cause to be stricken from the docket, for the reason that it had no jurisdiction to try the merits of the action, and rendered judgment against the defendant for all costs which had accrued in said Court.” To this ruling the defendant excepted. It is conceded that the claim upon which the suit is founded, being against an administrator in his fiduciary character, the justice had no jurisdiction of the cause. Still the defendant, judgment having been rendered against him, had a'right to appeal. 2 R. S., G-. & H., p. 501, § 62; id, p. 593, § 64, And the Court in which the appeal is pending must adjudge the point of jurisdiction. In this instance such adjudication resulted in favor of the defendant; he was the prevailing party, and it seems “ reasonable and proper that he recover a judgment for his costs.” Dixon v. Hill, 8 Ind. 149.

J. W. Burton, for the appellant.B. A. Clements, Jr., for the appellee.

¶7¥e are of opinion that the Circuit Court, in rendering judgment against the defendant for costs, committed an error.

Per Curiam.

¶8The judgment is reversed, with directions to the Court below to dismiss the suit at the costs of the plaintiff. Costs here against the appellee.

/22/ind/115 · .json · Public domain