Forrester v. Sisco

Brent, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. A motion is made to dismiss the appeal in this case, upon the ground that after the judgment by default the damages were assessed by an inquisition The case of the Wilmington and Susquehanna R. R. vs. Condon, 8 G. & J., 448 , is relied upon as conclusive of the question. The inquisition in that case and the present is a totally different proceeding. There the inquisition was for the con ⁵⁸⁸ demnation of land for the use of the railroad and a special power was given to the County Court of reviewing it, and confirming or setting it aside.

From the exercise of this special jurisdiction the Court held there was no appeal, hut they never meant to intimate that an appeal would not lie in any case in which an inquisition hy a jury was had. The inquisition in this case is not in the exercise of a special limited jurisdiction conferred on the Baltimore City Court, but is the means of perfecting a judgment rendered in the exercise of its ordinary jurisdiction. The motion to dismiss is overruled. The declaration in this case is filed on behalf of the administratrix of James Sisco, on behalf of his widow, and on behalf of the guardian of his minor child, alleging, in the first count, damages to them respectively occasioned hy the defendant’s so obstructing and closing up an alley way as to deprive them of the proper use and enjoyment of a house and lot built thereon.

The second count seems to charge damages sustained only hy the widow. Upon this declaration judgment by default was obtained. When a jury was thereafter