Chittenden v. Judson

• Decision Date: 20 June 1889
• Citation: 17 A. 929,57 Conn. 333
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: CHITTENDEN v. JUDSON.

17 A. 929

57 Conn. 333

CHITTENDEN

v. JUDSON.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

June 20, 1889.

E. F. Cole, for appellant. C. W. Gillett and D. F. Webster, for appellee.

BEARSDLEY, J. Plaintiff appeals from judgment of superior court for New Haven county. The action was originally brought to the May term, 1887, of the district court of Waterbury. After the 1st day of January, 1888, judgment was rendered by that court in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed from that judgment to the superior court for New Haven county. That court rendered judgment dismissing the case for want of jurisdiction. The question whether the superior court had jurisdiction by the appeal is the only one presented by the record. It is admitted that if the appeal had been taken before the 1st day of January, 1888, when the Revision of 1888 went into effect, it would, under the statute then in force, have been properly taken to the superior court, but the defendant claims that the statute giving the supreme court of errors jurisdiction of such appeals, first found in the Revision of 1888, § 1129, abolishes the jurisdiction of the superior court in respect to cases pending when it went into effect, as well as those which were brought afterwards. The defendant would be right in this claim, if that statute stood alone. But the application of the statute is limited to cases brought after it went into effect, by the following provisions in Gen. St. 1888: Sec. 4016. "All public laws not contained in the foregoing titles, * * * and all public laws except such as by particular provision and this title are continued in force, are repealed. Sec. 4017. Said repeal shall not impair or affect any act done, or any right accruing, accrued, or acquired; and all matters, civil or criminal, commenced by virtue of the laws so repealed, and pending on the first day of January, 1888, may be prosecuted and defended to final effect in the same manner as they might under the laws existing on the thirty-first day of December, 1887, unless it shall be otherwise specially provided by law." By virtue of this provision, this statute referred to has no relation to suits brought before it went into operation. Not merely the rights of the parties existing at the time when such suits were instituted are unaffected by it, but also the manner of proceeding in them. Such cases are subject to the old statute, as if it had not been repealed, or the new one enacted. The judgment of the superior...