Hancock v. Hutcherson

• Decision Date: 03 August 1882
• Citation: 76 Va. 609
• Parties: HANCOCK v. HUTCHERSON AND WIFE.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

76 Va. 609

HANCOCK v. HUTCHERSON AND WIFE.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

August 3, 1882

Appeal from decree of circuit court of Franklin county, pronounced 2d March, 1881, in the suit of George T. Hutcherson and Cleopatria, his wife, against Abram B. Hancock. In April 1871, Cleopatria Hancock, a minor, filed a bill in the county court of Franklin county, by B. P. Hancock, her next friend and guardian, against said A. B. Hancock, who who had been her guardian, for final settlement. Defendant filed his answer, and the usual accounts were taken. In August, 1871, a final decree was pronounced, directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the sum of $17.18, with interest from 4th January, 1869, and her costs. She was married on 15th February, 1872, and her coverture still continues. She arrived at twenty-one years of age on 6th February, 1876. On 16th May, 1879, her husband and she filed, in the circuit court of said county, their bill to review the said decree for error in law upon its face. Defendant demurred to and answered the bill of review; but the circuit court reversed the said decree, and ascertaining the defendant's indebtedness as guardian to the female plaintiff to be $377.88, with interest from 4th January, 1869, directed him to pay to the plaintiffs that sum, with its interests and the costs of the suit. Thereupon the defendant obtained an appeal to this court.

J A. Early, for appellant.

Flournoy & Barksdale, for appellees.

OPINION

ANDERSON J.

This is a plain case for reversal. The bill of review was filed in the circuit court of Franklin county to review a final decree of the county court, in a cause of which it had full and complete jurisdiction. One court cannot review the decree of another court unless special jurisdiction is given to it by statute. The act of assembly taking away jurisdiction of the county courts in civil suits at common law and in equity does not give to the circuit courts jurisdiction to review the final decision of the county court in any cause upon a bill of review. The only remedy provided for the party who feels himself aggrieved is by appeal or writ of error. The act of assembly referred to-- Session Acts of 1872-73, ch. 395, § 6, p. 383--only provides for the removal of such causes at law and in chancery as were pending in the county court on the day this act takes effect, of which said court had no jurisdiction under this act.

There was no error of law upon the face of the decree which could be corrected by a bill of review. The doctrine on this subject is well settled by this court in the case of Rawlings' Ex'or v. Rawlings and als. (1 Matthews, p. 88), Judge Burks delivering the opinion. Taking the facts to be as stated in the decree or admitted in the pleadings, it must appear that the court erred in point of law. You cannot look into the evidence in the case in order to show that the decree is erroneous in its statement of facts. If the errors...