Edwards v. Smith

• Decision Date: 21 September 1891
• Citation: 27 P. 809,16 Colo. 529
• Parties: EDWARDS v. SMITH.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

27 P. 809

16 Colo. 529

EDWARDS v. SMITH.

Supreme Court of Colorado

September 21, 1891

Appeal from district court, Eagle county; L. M. GODDARD, Judge.

This action was originally begun before a justice of the peace. Subsequently an appeal was taken to the county court, where the following stipulation was entered into: 'It is stipulated by and between the parties to this action that the venue therein be changed from the county court of Eagle county, Colo., to the district court. * * * And it is further stipulated and agreed that, upon the trial of this action in the said district court of Eagle county, all matters and differences arising and growing out of the use, injuries, or damages to the team of horses and wagon, which defendant now has possession of by virtue of a judgment rendered at the June term, A. D. 1887, of said district court, sitting in and for Eagle county, in an action between the parties hereto may be adjudicated upon, up to and including the day of trial, by said district court.' The cause being called for trial in the district court, it was further 'agreed by the parties hereto, in open court, that six jurors shall try this cause.' The trial resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Smith, for the sum of $174.75. The defendant, Edwards, appeals to this court.

Syllabus by the Court

1. Where parties appear, and by stipulation submit their controversy to a court having juris diction of the subject-matter thereof, they cannot afterwards be heard to question the authority of such tribunal.

2. An objection to instructions should be specific, so as to afford the trial court an opportunity for reviewing and correcting the charge, if found erroneous.

A F. Gunnell and A. R. Brown, for appellant.

Montgomery & Frost, for appellee.

ELLIOTT, J., ( after stating the facts as above.)

It is contended by counsel for appellant that the action is one of equitable cognizance, and so not within the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace before whom the suit was originally instituted. Upon this ground it is assigned for error that the district court was without jurisdiction to try the cause. Whether the objection to the jurisdiction of the district court might have been maintained if it had been insisted on in apt time, without waiver, we need not consider. There being no necessity for written pleadings in cases originating before justices of the peace, the question whether the justice has jurisdiction in a particular case must ordinarily be determined from the evidence. In this case, however, we regard the stipulation entered into between the parties as decisive of the jurisdictional question. After the cause had reached the county court the parties entered into a stipulation in writing, making it a part of the record,...