Bushey v. Culler

Bartol, J., delivered the opinion of this Court. In our opinion, the question presented by the plaintiff’s first exception is settled by the decision in Bullitt vs. Musgrave, 3 Gill, 32 . “Where from the nature of a submission the judgment of arbitrators may he influenced or enlightened by the adduction of- evidence, the parties are entitled, to notice of the time and place of their proceeding to investigate the matters submitted to them.” Such was the nature of the submission in this case; there was consequently no error in admitting evidence to prove that such notice was not given, to the defendant. The ruling by the Circuit Court stated in the appellant’s second exception, is not ground for reversal, because it was in conformity with a rule of that Court, which it had the discretion to adopt to preserve order in the trial of causes, and to promote fho'dispatch of business. The only remaining point made by the appellant, is that the Circuit Court erred in directing a judgment of non pross. to be entered on the verdict.

The suit is upon an agreement under seal wherein the ⁵⁵² penalty is fixed at $1,000; the verdict was in favor of the plaintiff for one dollar. ( Decided March 13th, 1867.) In construing the several Acts of Assembly regulating the civil jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace, ( prior to the Act of 1852,) the Court of Appeals determined that while in actions,for ¿oris, the jurisdiction depended upon the amount of damages claimed, the test of jurisdiction