Mohr v. Sonnet

Decision Date14 August 1939
Citation8 A.2d 109,17 N.J.Misc. 226
PartiesMOHR v. SONNET.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

Action by Charles H. Mohr against Carl Sonnet for damages to lands, buildings and shrubbery in Middlesex county, which was transferred from a district court in Essex county to the Perth Amboy district court. On defendant's motion to dismiss the action.

Action dismissed.

Parker E. Nielsen, of Perth Amboy, for plaintiff.

Huyler E. Romond, of Perth Amboy, and Osborne, Cornish & Scheck, of Newark, for defendant.

MELKO, Judge.

The plaintiff brought this action in the District Court of the Second Judicial District of the County of Essex, seeking to recover damages allegedly caused by the defendant's automobile negligently striking and destroying lands, buildings, and shrubbery of the plaintiff located in Middlesex county.

Defendant's objection that this was a local action and under the provision of Revised Statutes 1937, 2:27-18, N.J.S.A. 2:27-18, should be tried in the County in which the real estate in question is situated or the cause of action arose, was sustained and an order made accordingly transferring the action to the Perth Amboy District Court.

Defendant now appears specially and moves to dismiss the action under the provision of Revised Statutes 1937, 2:8-38, N.J. S.A. 2:8-38, which provides that "* * the territorial jurisdiction of every district court shall be coextensive with the limits of the county wherein the city or judicial district court is established." The defendant resides in the County of Essex and it is his contention that he is not within the territorial jurisdiction of the Perth Amboy District Court.

The transfer was made by virtue of the Transfer of Causes Act, R.S. 2:26-60, N.J S.A. 2:26-60, which provides: "No cause or matter pending in the court of chancery, supreme court, a circuit court, a court of common pleas, a district court, a court of oyer and terminer, a court of quarter sessions or a court of special sessions shall be dismissed solely on the ground that such court is without jurisdiction of the subject matter, either in the original suit or on appeal, but the cause or matter shall be transferred, with the record thereof and all the papers filed in the cause, to the proper court for hearing and determination. The record shall, when necessary, include a transcript of all entries and proceedings in the cause."

The District Courts are creatures of the Legislature, which can assign them such territorial...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Beca Realty, Inc. v. Eisberg
    • United States
    • New Jersey District Court
    • 15 Noviembre 1973
    ...116 N.J.L. 449, 185 A. 477 (Sup.Ct.1936). See also, MacPhail v. Nassau, 14 N.J.Misc. 292, 184 A. 633, D.Ct. (1936); Mohr v. Sonnet, 17 N.J.Misc. 226, 8 A.2d 109 (S.Ct.1939); and also Globe Industrial Loan Corp. v. Caldwell, 20 N.J.Misc. 435, 28 A.2d 775 (D.Ct.1942), where it was held that a......
  • Globe Indus. Loan Corp. v. Caldwell
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 17 Septiembre 1942
    ...sees fit. See MacPhail v. Nassau, 184 A. 633, 14 N.J.Misc. 292; Wall Rope Works v. Sperling, 116 N.J.L. 449, 185 A. 477. Mohr v. Sonnet, 8 A.2d 109, 17 N.J.Misc. 226. The Legislature has in several specific instances extended the jurisdiction of the District Court as follows: R.S. 2:32-155,......
  • Boylan v. Joyce
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 18 Agosto 1939

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT