Maxwell v. Bd. of Comm'rs

• Decision Date: 23 January 1889
• Parties: Maxwell v. Board of Commissioners.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

119 Ind. 20

19 N.E. 617

Maxwell

v.Board of Commissioners.¹

Supreme Court of Indiana.

January 23, 1889.

Appeal from circuit court, Fulton county; Isaiah Conner, Judge.

Action by Elias Maxwell against the board of commissioners of Fulton county to recover damages sustained by reason of a falling bridge. Rev. St. Ind. 1881, § 5771, allowed a claimant whose claim was disallowed by the board to appeal, or, at his option, bring an action against the county. Acts 1885, p. 80, § 3, re-enacted the same provision.

M. L. Essick and George W. Holman, for appellant. Julius Rowley and M. A. Baker, for appellee.

Coffey, J.

This cause was commenced and tried in the Fulton circuit court, resulting in a judgment for the appellant, from which an appeal was taken to this court, where the judgment was reversed. See Commissioners v. Maxwell, 101 Ind. 268. After the cause was remanded to the court below it was dismissed by the appellant, and on the 17th day of March, 1886, he commenced this action.

The complaint charges that while driving over one of defendant's bridges with a portable engine on the 23d day of July, 1883, said bridge broke down, precipitating the wagon, team, and said engine, the property of the plaintiff, into the stream over which said bridge was constructed, whereby the same was greatly injured, to the plaintiff's damage; that said bridge was out of repair, and defendant, having notice thereof, negligently failed to repair the same, by reason of which said injury occurred, without the fault or negligence of the plaintiff.

The defendant filed an answer in three paragraphs to this complaint. The first and second were subsequently withdrawn, leaving the third paragraph as the only answer on file. This answer alleges that the identical claim set out in the complaint was filed with the auditor of Fulton county, at the September term, 1883, of the board of commissioners of said county; that said claim was tried before said board of commissioners, and was rejected and disallowedby them, which judgment of rejection and disallowance still remains of record unappealed.

The plaintiff filed a demurrer to this answer, alleging as cause that the same did not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense of the plaintiff's complaint. The demurrer was overruled by the court, to which ruling the plaintiff excepted, and the defendant had judgment for costs. From this judgment the plaintiff appeals to this court, and assigns for error the overruling of his demurrer to said answer.

It is settled in this state that the board of commissioners is a court of limited jurisdiction, and that, in passing upon claims presented to it, it acts in a judicial capacity. Board v. Gregory, 42 Ind. 32;State v. Board, etc., 101 Ind. 73. Its adjudications in matters over which it has jurisdiction are as binding upon the parties as the adjudications of any other court. The board of commissioners of Fulton county had exclusive jurisdiction over this claim, and their adjudication upon it was, at the time it was made, binding on all the parties. Commissioners v. Maxwell and State v. Board, etc., supra.

Section 5771, Rev. St. 1881, was repealed by...