Murphy v. City of Meridian
Murphy v. City of Meridian
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
This suit was begun in the chancery court. From an inspection of the bill of complaint it appears that the circuit court has exclusive jurisdiction of the cause, and the chancery court was right in so holding. However, the cause should not have been dismissed, but should have been transferred to the circuit court. The section of the Constitution applicable here is as follows: “Sec. 162. All causes that may be brought in the chancery court whereof the circuit court has exclusive jurisdiction shall be transferred to the circuit court.”
Section 161 applies to causes whereof the circuit and chancery courts have concurrent jurisdiction, in which event, should it appear to the circuit court that “the accounts to be investigated are mutual and complicated,” “that court may, on application of the defendant, transfer the causes to the chancery court. ” This cause is not within the class referred to in the last-named section of the Constitution.
Neither does section 147 of the Constitution apply to the cause made by the bill of complaint. That section merely provides that the supreme court may not reverse or annul a judgment, or decree, “from any error or mistake. as to whether the cause in which it was rendered was of equity or common law jurisdiction.” If the chancery court had assumed jurisdiction of this cause, and decreed or denied relief, then that section of the Constitution would come into play and would be controlling with this court. It will be observed that the chancery court declined to take jurisdiction, and dismissed the cause because of want of jurisdiction. In our view of the Con
It is visibly clear that section 162 was designed to meet a case precisely like this. The complainant, by his bill, makes a ease whereof the circuit court has exclusive jurisdiction; and, when the chancery court decided to decline jurisdiction, section 162 is mandatory, and the ■chancery court should have transferred the cause to the circuit court for trial.
We think it proper to add that the measure of damages adopted by the bill of complaint may be one of the evidential facts by which the damages may be established, and may be used as such for that purpose.
Reversed and remanded, with instructions to the -chancery court to transfer the cause to the cirrcuit court
Reversed and remanded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Mrs. M. J. Murphy v. City of Meridian
- Cited By
- 12 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Courts. Chancery. Transfer of causes. Concurrent jurisdiction. Constitutional law. Mutual accounts. Municipal corporations. Change of street grade. Measure of damages. Under Constitution 1890, section 162, so providing, where a case is brought in the chancery court whereof the circuit court has exclusive jurisdiction, the ease should not be dismissed but transferred to the circuit court. 2. Equity. Concurrent jurisdiction: Constitutional law'. Mutual accounts. Section 161, Constitution 1890, applies to causes whereof the circuit and chancery courts have concurrent jurisdiction, in which event, should it appear to the circuit court that the “accounts to be investigated are mutual and complicated,” that court may on application of the defendant transfer the cause to the chancery court, but this section has no application to a suit for damages caused by the laying of a pavement and change of grade in which it is alleged that it was necessary for plaintiff to raise her residence, surface her yard, etc., as in such case there are no such mutual and complicated accounts to be investigated as is contemplated by said section. 3. Appeal and Error. Reversal. Mistake as to common law or equity jurisdiction. Constitution 1890, section lj.7. Section 147, Constitution 1890, providing that the supreme court may not reverse or amend a decree “for any error or mistake as to whether the cause in which it was rendered was of equity or common law jurisdiction,” only applies where the court below had assumed jurisdiction of the cause and granted or denied relief, but has no application where the court below decided to decline jurisdiction at the start and dismissed the ease, because of want of jurisdiction. 4. Municipal Corporations. Change of grade. Measure of damages. Evidence. In a suit for damages against a municipal corporation for changing the grade of a street, evidence of the cost of raising plaintiff’s residence, surfacing her yard, laying a walk, etc., is admissible in establishing her damage.