White v. Morse
| Decision Date | 02 March 1885 |
| Citation | 29 N.E. 539,139 Mass. 162 |
| Parties | Albert White v. Edwin C. Morse[1] |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Tort for acts done by the defendant as a trial justice. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Rockwell, J., who rendered a judgment for the defendant; and the plaintiff appealed to this court. The facts appear in the opinion.
Judgment for the defendant.
N. D Pratt, for the plaintiff.
P. H Cooney, for the defendant.
Morton, C. J.
The principle that judicial officers, whether of superior or inferior courts, are not liable to civil actions for errors of judgment upon matters within their jurisdiction, is too well established to require any citation of authorities.
In the case before us, it appears that one Shattuck, in November, 1883, sued out a trustee writ against the present plaintiff, returnable before the defendant, who is a trial justice. The writ was duly served, and the defendant, as trial justice, had jurisdiction of the parties to the suit and of the subject matter. After due hearing, he rendered judgment for the plaintiff in that action for ten dollars, damages, and eleven dollars and ninety-eight cents, costs of suit, and the trustee was duly charged. No appeal having been claimed, the trial justice issued an execution for the amount of the judgment. The execution was paid by the trustee from funds in his hands belonging to the present plaintiff, who thereupon brought this action to recover of the trial justice the amount paid as costs upon said execution, upon the ground that, under the Pub. Sts. c. 183, § 88, [2] he had no right to render judgment or to issue execution for costs.
The action cannot be maintained. The question whether, in the case pending before him, the plaintiff was entitled to costs, was a judicial question, which the trial justice was required to adjudicate. His decision of this question was strictly within his jurisdiction.
It is true that, if a justice of the peace exceeds his jurisdiction, he is liable to a private action for any wrongful act done outside of his jurisdiction to the injury of another. Piper v. Pearson, 2 Gray 120. Clarke v. May, 2 Gray 410. Sullivan v. Jones, 2 Gray 570. In this case, in rendering a judgment for costs, the defendant was not acting outside or in excess of his jurisdiction; his error was an error of judgment in deciding a question of law which he was obliged to decide, and which was within the scope and limits of his jurisdiction. For such error he is not liable to the plaintiff, whose proper remedy was by an appeal.
The plaintiff contends that the defendant, if not liable for rendering an erroneous judgment, is liable for the issuing of the execution, which is merely a ministerial act. If...
To continue reading
Request your trial