Darrell v. Biscoe
| Decision Date | 06 March 1902 |
| Citation | 51 A. 410,94 Md. 684 |
| Parties | DARRELL v. BISCOE. |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Appeal as upon writ of error, from circuit court, Kent county William R. Martin and Edwin H. Brown, Judges.
Replevin by Edward C. Biscoe against William Darrell. Judgment in the circuit court reversing a justice's judgment for defendant, and defendant appeals. Reversed.
Argued before McSHERRY, C.J., and FOWLER, BRISCOE, BOYD, PAGE PEARCE, SCHMUCKER, and JONES, JJ.
Hope H Barroll, and Jas. P. Gorter, for appellant.
Marion De K. Smith, for appellee.
The appellee, Edward C. Biscoe, sued out a writ of replevin against the appellant before Joseph E. Boyd, a justice of the peace for Kent county, for a horse which was in the appellant's possession. The justice, before issuing the writ, took from the plaintiff a replevin bond, in the penalty of $280, which recited that the horse about to be replevied was of the value of $140. The writ, which also recited the value of the horse at $140, was issued and placed in the hands of the constable, who returned it, "Replevied as per schedule, and the defendant summoned." The constable also returned along with the writ what purported to be a schedule and appraisement of the horse, in which it was valued at $90. The appraisement was signed by J.J. Lockwood and S.E. Cole as appraisers. The replevin case was heard before the justice, who rendered a judgment which, it is agreed, was intended to have been a judgment for the defendant for the property replevied and costs, and the plaintiff took an appeal to the circuit court for Kent county. The defendant, who is the appellant in the present record, moved the circuit court to quash the writ of replevin, and to dismiss the appeal from the justice, for want of jurisdiction on the part of the latter to issue the writ. In support of his motions he offered to prove by Joseph E. Boyd, the justice of the peace, that the plaintiff Biscoe, when he applied for the writ, stated that the horse was worth $140; that the justice stated to him that if such were the case he would not have jurisdiction to hear the case, and that the only way he could hear it would be for the appraisers to place the value of the horse at less than $100, in which event he would hear the case; that Biscoe then stated to the justice, in the presence of the constable to whom the writ was to issue, that they would see that the horse was appraised at less than $100. He further offered to prove by his own testimony that the constable came to his residence about November 9th with the two appraisers, when the latter said that they wanted to look at the horse, in order to appraise him, and that they would place his value at $90; that Darrell then asked the appraisers what they meant by doing such a thing, when the horse had sold in September for $130 at Powell's sale, and had a week or 10 days ago sold for $140 cash at a constable's sale; and that they replied: "We do that because it is the only way it can be tried before a justice of the peace; make it less than $100." He further offered to prove by Lockwood, one of the appraisers, that he was told by the constable that the horse would have to be appraised at less than $100 in order to have the case tried before the justice, and that he accordingly appraised it at $90. The circuit court rejected the testimony so offered, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial