Strickland v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co.
Strickland v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co.
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
The question for decision in this case is whether the provi-sion of section 3 of the act creating a County Court for Richland county (30 Stat. 156), which confers upon that Court exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals in all civil cases from magistrates’ Courts, is constitutional.
The provisions of the Constitution bearing upon the question are found in sections 1, 15, and 23 of article V, the pertinent parts of which are:
*69 “Section 1. The judicial power of this State shall be vested in a Supreme Court, in two Circuit Courts, to wit: A Court of Common Pleas having civil jurisdiction and a Court of General Sessions with criminal jurisdiction only. The General Assembly may also establish County Courts, municipal Courts and such Courts in any "or all of the counties of this State inferior to Circuit Courts as may be deemed necessary, but none of such Courts shall ever be invested with jurisdiction to try cases of murder, manslaughter, rape or attempt to rape, arson, common law burglary, bribery or perjury.”
“Sec. 15. The Courts of Common Pleas shall have original jurisdiction, subject to appeal to the Supreme Court, to issue writs or orders of injunction, mandamus, habeas corpus, and such other writs as may be necessary to carry their powers into full effect. They shall have jurisdiction in all civil cases. They shall have appellate jurisdiction in all civil cases within the jurisdiction of inferior Courts, except from such inferior Court from which the General Assembly shall provide an appeal directly to the Supreme Court.”
“Sec. 23. Every civil action cognizable by magistrates shall be brought before a magistrate in the county where the defendant resides, and every criminal action in the county where the offense was committed. In all cases tried by them, the right of appeal shall be secured under such rules and regulations as may be provided by law.”
The provision of section 23 fortifies this conclusion, for, while it is there declared that, in all cases tried by magistrates, the right of appeal shall be secured, no appellate tribunal is specified; and we, find no inhibition in that section, or elsewhere, against providing for an appeal to any other than the Circuit Court. The intention there expressed *71 is that the right of appeal to some higher tribunal shall be secured by law, and that it shall be subject to such rules and regulations as the legislature may see fit to adopt; that is, such as fix the time within which and the conditions upon which an appeal may be taken, the manner in which it shall be prepared and prosecuted, and so forth.
The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Constitutional, Law — Jurisdiction—Power or Legislature. — Where the Constitution confers jurisdiction upon a Court, the legislature cannot take it away. 2. Courts — Constitution—County Court — Court op Common Pleas.— Since the legislature cannot deprive the Court of Common Pleas of the jurisdiction in civil cases or of the appellate jurisdiction in cases within the jurisdiction of magistrates’ Courts, given by Const., art. V, sec. 15, the legislative power, given by sec. 1, to establish county Courts, may be exerted by conferring upon a county Court established by the legislature concurrent jurisdiction with that invested in the Court of Common Pleas, including, in view of sec. 23, concurrent jurisdiction over appeals from magistrates’ Courts. 3. Statutes — Partial Unconstitutionaeitst. — In view of Const., art. V, secs. 1, IS, 23, the act creating a county Court for Richland county, act March 1, 1917 (30 St. at Large, p. 156), sec. 3, purporting to confer upon that Court exclusive jurisdiction over appeals from magistrates’ Courts, is constitutional so far as it gives such Court jurisdiction of such appeals, and unconstitutional and void only so far as it attempts to make that jurisdiction exclusive.