From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ferguson v. Baron

U.S.
Jan 1, 1790
2 U.S. 113 (1790)

Opinion

SEPTEMBER TERM, 1790.

Bradford, in support of the judgment, read the proceedings of the Court Martial; and the section of the Militia act, relative to the recovery of fines.

Levy contended, that the Justices had proceeded without jurisdiction; for, their authority under the act was merely ministerial, to issue an execution; whereas they had undertaken to hold plea on the subject matter.

BY THE COURT: — It is an extraordinary objection, to proceed from the defendant, that he had notice before an execution issued against him. The measure was a liberal and indulgent one; and ought not to be discountenanced if in general practice.

Judgment affirmed.


ON the return to a Certiorari, issued to remove the record of the proceedings that were had in this case, before Justices McKnight and Todd, it appeared that the defendant, having been tried by a Regimental Court Martial, for a breach of the rules of discipline, was fined to the value of ten days labour, (£.1 15.) that on an application made by the plaintiff, who acted as clerk of the company, to the Justices, they issued a summons to the defendant; and that, on the return of the process, they gave judgment conformably to the sentence of the Court Martial.


Summaries of

Ferguson v. Baron

U.S.
Jan 1, 1790
2 U.S. 113 (1790)
Case details for

Ferguson v. Baron

Case Details

Full title:FERGUSON, Captain of Militia, versus BARON, a Private

Court:U.S.

Date published: Jan 1, 1790

Citations

2 U.S. 113 (1790)