Cole v. Hayes
| Decision Date | 31 December 1886 |
| Citation | 7 A. 391,78 Me. 539 |
| Parties | COLE v. HAYES. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
On exceptions by defendant from supreme judicial court, Oxford county. Assumpsit on a promissory note.
Geo. D. Bisbee and Oscar H. Hersey, for plaintiff.
James S. Wright and J. B. Peaks, for defendant.
By Rev. St. c. 83, § 3, trial justices "have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all civil actions, * * * when the debt or damages demanded do not exceed twenty dollars," except certain cases therein specified. In this case the note declared on is for $12, and interest. The ad damnum is for more than $20. It is claimed by the defendant that the "debt or damages demanded" is to be determined by computing the amount due on the note when the action was commenced, and not by the ad damnum. We think this is not the law. It appears to be well settled that, in all actions sounding in damages, as assumpsit and tort, the jurisdiction depends upon the ad damnum, which is the amount of damages demanded. Estes v. White, 61 Me. 22; Hapgood v. Doherty, 8 Gray, 373; Bank v. Pearson, 14 Gray, 521. In such case it cannot be judicially determined that the debt or damages which the plaintiff is entitled to recover are less than the ad damnum until judgment is rendered, and then, if it be for a sum less than $20, it does not affect the jurisdiction. Ladd v. Kimball, 12 Gray, 139.
Exceptions overruled.
1 Reported by Leslie C. Cornish, Esq., of the Augusta bar.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kroeger v. Safranek
...office of the ad damnum in a pleading is to fix the amount beyond which a party may not recover on the trial of his action. Cole v. Hayes, 78 Me. 539, 7 A. 391; Karnuff v. Kelch, 69 N.J.L. 499, 55 A. 163; Vincent v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'n, 75 Conn. 650, 55 A. 'The general rule is th......
-
Gable v. Pathfinder Irr. Dist.
...office of the ad damnum in a pleading is to fix the amount beyond which a party may not recover on the trial of his action. Cole v. Hayes, 78 Me. 539, 7 A. 391; Karnuff v. Kelch, 69 N.J.Law 499, 55 A. 163; Vincent v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'n, 75 Conn. 650, 55 A. The general rule is th......
-
Nat'l Publicity Soc. v. Raye
...computing the amount due on the specific claim or account annexed as set forth in the declaration. Estes v. White, 61 Me. 22; Cole v. Hayes, 78 Me. 539, 7 Atl. 391; Spaulding v. Yeaton, 82 Me. 92, 19 Atl. 156; Smith v. Hunt, 91 Me. 572, 40 Atl. Under section 4 the Eastport municipal court i......
-
Crawford v. Hurd Refrigerator Co
...N.C. 650; Sweeny v. Lowe, 6 B. Mon. 314; Planters' Bank v. Caulson, 7 Miss. 395; Decklar v. Frankenberger, 30 La. Ann. Part 1,410; Cole v. Hayes, 78 Me. 539. J. Buck, J., absent, sick, took no part. OPINION Mitchell, J. The municipal court of the city of Duluth is created by Sp. Laws 1891, ......