Maryland case law › Ranoul v. Griffie

Ranoul v. Griffie

3 Md. 54 (1852) · Maryland Court of Appeals
Maryland Court of AppealsDisposition: ReversedLe Grand, C. J.✓ Good law
HoldingThis was an action of replevin brought by the appellee (Griffie) to recover a horse that the appellant (Ranoul) had purchased at a sheriff's sale under a fieri facias issued on a judgment obtained by one Frazier against the appellee.

Le Grand, C. J., delivered the opinion of this court. This was an action of replevin, instituted by the appellee, to recover a horse which the appellant had purchased at a sheriff’s sale, under a fieri facias, issued on a judgment obtained by one Frazier against the appellee. The facts of the case are substantially these: Frazier sued the appellee before a single justice of the peace in election district No. 4, of Carroll county, and obtained a judgment. The appellee appealed to the district court of the same district, whereupon, at the instance of Frazier, the case was removed to district court, No. 5, and a judgment obtained, on which issued the fieri facias under which the horse was sold to the appellant.

When the case was appealed to district No. 4, no petition was filed by the appellant. There was no objection, so far as we are informed by the record, taken at the time of the trial to the jurisdiction of the court. 60 Under this state of case the appellee, in substance, asked the circuit court at the trial of this action, to instruct the jury if they should find the facts we have given, that then the judgment of district court No. 5, was void, and the plaintiff, the present appellee, entitled to recover. In thus ruling we think the circuit court erred. Were it conceded, that irregularities existed in the proceedings before the justices, yet, if they had jurisdiction of the subject and of the parties, the purchaser took a go.od title, there being nothing wrong on the face of the writ of fieri facias, The principle is well settled, that the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, when .cowing incidentally in .question, or offered as eyidence .of title in any court, is conclusive upon the question decided, and cannot be impeached on the ground of informality in the proceedings, or error or mistake of the court, in the matter which has been adjudicated.

Raborg’s Adm’x, vs. Hammond’s Adm’r, 2 Harr. and Gill, 42. Barney vs. Patterson, 6 H. & J., 182 . Fishwick vs. Sewell, 4 H. & J., 394 . This being so the

This is a preview of Ranoul v. Griffie. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.