| |
Described below are series of writs by which cases in lower courts were transferred to or reviewed by the Supreme Court of Judicature. Writs of error were employed by the Supreme Court to review final judgments of inferior courts of record (courts possessing a seal and a clerk). Writs of certiorari were used to transfer proceedings to the Supreme Court from a lower court of record prior to final judgment; to review the final judgment of an inferior court not of record (such as justices of the peace); and to review quasi-judicial decisions of public officers. Also described are small series of writs of habeas corpus and mandamus. The office of filing of these various series of writs is sometimes uncertain. However, J0134, J0137, J0140 Judgment Rolls include the money judgments awarded on writs of certiorari and error and filed in the upstate offices of the Supreme Court. The judgment record in such cases contains a copy of the writ and the return thereto.
|
|
| J0147 |
Writs of Certiorari ca. 1796-1847. 45.6 cu. ft.
Until the l820s most of the cases brought into the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari were judgments of courts of justices of the peace, which were not courts of record. Laws of 1824, Chap. 238, effectively ended this use of writ of certiorari in civil cases. The writ of certiorari could be used to review a criminal case from a justice's court of special sessions only if the writ were allowed by a Supreme Court justice. A writ of certiorari could also be employed to transfer a case from a lower court of record (court of common pleas or mayor's court) into the Supreme Court prior to final judgment. (After judgment a writ of error was employed.) A few criminal cases were transferred by certiorari to the Supreme Court from the courts of general sessions and courts of oyer and terminer. Finally, common law permitted use of writs of certiorari to review quasi-judicial decisions of officials such as the canal appraisers and town commissioners of highways.
A typical file in this series contains the following documents: affidavit, writ of certiorari, and certified record of proceedings. The writ of certiorari was applied for in an affidavit, in which the applicant specified the type of civil action or criminal charge and described the proceedings thus far, stating any errors alleged to have occurred. The affidavit bears a note that the writ was allowed by a Supreme Court justice or commissioner. The writ of certiorari was an order of the Supreme Court, commanding the judges of a lower court or a justice of the peace to return a certified transcript of the pleadings and proceedings in the case. On the dorso of the writ are found the names of the parties and defendant's attorney, the filing date, and the signature of the justice or other officer who allowed the writ to be issued.
|
|
 |
Writ of Certiorari, 1817. This writ orders a Columbia County justice of the peace to certify and return to the Supreme Court for review a copy of proceedings in a civil case heard by him. An 1824 statute ended the routine appeal of cases from justice courts directly to the Supreme Court. (Series J0147 Writs of Certiorari [Albany].) |
|
| |
The record of a case in a court of common pleas generally includes the following documents: copy of the writ or bill of complaint by which the action was commenced; copies of the plaintiffs declaration and defendant's plea; minutes of the trial and verdict; occasionally a summary of the testimony; and any other documents that were part of the official case record. The record of civil or criminal proceedings before a justice of the peace takes the form of a narrative summary of the case, since his was not a court of record. Returns from a justice of the peace sometimes include copies of the warrant or summons by which the action was commenced. The record of a criminal case returned by the clerk of a court of general sessions or a court of oyer and terminer usually includes the following documents: copy of the bill of indictment; defendant's recognizance of bail; summary of testimony; and a copy of the trial minutes, including the verdict. Prior to around 1820, the returns to writ of certiorari often contain briefs by the attorneys for the opposing parties and their stipulations of points not in dispute. The entire bundle of documents attached to the writ is sometimes called an error book.
The writs of certiorari were originally arranged either chronologically by filing date or court term, or alphabetically by original defendant, or under the name of the justice who allowed the writs. Many writs are out of order, and often even the office of filing is uncertain. The affidavits prior to around 1816 were bundled separately. The series contains relatively few documents dating prior to 1807. There is an index. Affirmances or reversals of judgments in lower courts are found in the minutes of the Supreme Court, J0128, J0129, J0130. Arguments on writs of certiorari were enumerated motions placed on the calendars, J0241, J1241, J2241. Judgments in cases removed to the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari from a lower courts are found in J0134, J0137, J0l40 Judgment Rolls.
|
|
| J0029 |
Writs of Habeas Corpus (Utica), 1807-29. 1.3 cu. ft.
A writ of habeas corpus was a Supreme Court order commanding a judge, sheriff, or keeper of a prison or jail to deliver an individual into the custody of the court, and to state the legal authority for his detention The writ took several forms, the most common being the writ of habeas corpus cum causa. This writ was obtained by a defendant to transfer a case from a lower court to the Supreme Court. (The defendant might be either imprisoned or released on recognizance of bail.) Unlike the writ of certiorari, the writ of habeas corpus cum causa usually did not transfer the record of case proceedings to the Supreme Court. Therefore, the proceedings in Supreme Court had to commence anew. The writ of habeas corpus was also employed to produce a person in custody of a court or a prison to testify in the trial of another defendant; or to remove a prisoner from one county to another for trial or sentence; or to produce for trial a prisoner who had been illegally detained (No examples of this last and most famous usage of the writ have been noticed in the present series) Each writ of habeas corpus bears a note stating that it had been allowed by a Supreme Court Justice or a counselor There is also a certificate by a court clerk, sheriff, or other officer stating that the manner of execution of the writ appears on an annexed schedule The schedule states the reason for detention of the defendant or prisoner. It may cite or include a copy of process or other written authority ordering him to be taken into custody. (In civil cases, this was the writ of capias ad respondendum; in criminal cases, the warrant of commitment or the indictment; and for convicted prisoners, the minutes of conviction and sentence.)
The writs are bundled by years but are otherwise unarranged. Laws of 1787, Chap. 72, provided for issuance of writs of habeas corpus to remove civil causes from inferior courts into the Supreme Court of Judicature; it specified that the writ would be issued only in cases where the sum in dispute exceeded 100 pounds. Laws of 1801, Chap. 13, changed the minimum amount to $250 and required the signature of a Supreme Court justice for a writ to be issued. Laws of 1787, Chap. 39, and Laws of 1801, Chap. 65, provided for the speedy execution and return of the writ of habeas corpus in criminal cases, Use of the writ of habeas corpus in both civil and criminal cases was codified in the Revised Statutes of 1829, Part III, Chap. 9, Title 1, Arts. 1-3.
|
|
| J0031 |
Writs of Error (Utica), 1807-47. 14.6 cu. ft.
A writ of error was obtained by a defendant to remove the judgment of an inferior court of record to the Supreme Court of Judicature for review, when the proceedings showed "manifest error" in law. Most of the cases reviewed on writ of error came up from the county-level court of common pleas. (Some of these cases had been appealed to common pleas from courts of justices of the peace.) A few criminal cases were removed by writ of error from courts of general sessions and courts of oyer and terminer. The Supreme Court also reviewed civil judgments of the New York City mayor's court (later called the court of common pleas), the superior courts in New York City and Buffalo, and the mayor's or recorder's courts of upstate cities. Errors of fact on the record of a judgment in the Supreme Court itself were reviewed in the circuit courts.
A typical file in this series always includes the writ of error and the return or answer of the lower court, and often includes the defendant's bill of exceptions. The writ of error was a sealed order of the Supreme Court (before 1815, the Court of Chancery) commanding a lower court to return the record of pleadings, proceedings, and judgment. Usually the original defendant was the plaintiff in error. (In rare cases the original plaintiff might
|
|
 |
Return to Writ of Error, 1838. The writ directed the judges of the Jefferson County court of common pleas to send the record of the case of Lucy Rich vs. Joseph Wager to the Supreme Court for review. The attached record of proceedings (first page shown here) summarizes the case in the lower court, where Lucy Rich won a judgment for money wages owed her for board, lodging, and washing. Wager lost the case and sought to have the Supreme Court reverse the judgment on grounds of "manifest error" in the proceedings. Women were rarely parties to actions, since they could not sue in their own behalf if they were married. (Series J0031 Writs of Error [Utica].) |
|
| |
obtain a writ of error if he thought the judgment award was too small.) The writ states the names of the parties, the type of civil action or criminal charge, and the time and place for return of the writ. On the dorso are the names of the parties and the defendant's attorney, the filing date, and the signature of the justice or other officer who allowed the writ to be issued, in civil cases the certified record, or answer to the writ, consists of a copy of the judgment record. Occasionally the record is accompanied by a summary of testimony and rulings thereon, if the alleged error did not appear ott the record. In criminal cases, the record includes copies of the bill of indictment, trial minutes, and verdict, and sometimes a summary of the testimony and other proceedings.
A bill of exceptions is included in many but not all of the files. The bill of exceptions is the appellant's statement setting forth objections to the lower court proceedings. It often summarizes the proceedings not stated on the judgment record, which were the ground for exceptions. The bill of exceptions was filed by the defendant's attorney and signed by the judges of the lower court. It was returned to the Supreme Court case as part of the record and bears two filing dates, one for the local court, the other for the Supreme Court.
Two other documents are found occasionally. One is the bond of the plaintiff in error and two sureties for payment of damages and costs if the case go against him on review. The bond had the effect of staying execution of judgment in the lower court and permitted removal of the case to the higher court. The other is the certificate of a Supreme Court counselor stating that he has examined the record of proceedings and finds substantial error. A few files also contain the reply of the defendant in error. Finally, the series contains a few writs of error and attached records remitted, or sent back, to the Supreme Court from the Court of Errors.
Affirmances or reversals of cases reviewed by the Supreme Court on writ of error are entered in the minute books. Arguments on writs of error were enumerated motions placed on the calendars. Judgments affirming or reversing judgments of lower courts are found in the judgment rolls. The documents in this series are arranged by year. There is no index, but the minute books and calendars may help locate particular cases. Statutes governing writs of error were Laws of 1801, Chap. 25, Laws of 1817, Chap. 179, and the Revised Statutes of 1829, Part III, Chap. 9, Title 3, Art. 1.
|
|
| J0021 |
Bills of Exceptions, ca. 1805-47. .9 cu. ft.
This fragmentary series consists of bills of exceptions submitted by attorneys for defendants in inferior courts (civil or criminal) who intended to apply for a writ of error. The bill summarizes the proceedings to which exception is taken and is certified and signed by the judge (or judges) of the lower court. The office of original filing is uncertain. Many more bills of exceptions are found in J0031 Writs of Error. The documents are unarranged and unindexed.
|
|
| J8011 |
Assignments of Errors (Albany), 1837-39, 1844-47. .2 cu. ft.
This series consists of assignments of errors made by plaintiffs in error. The assignment of errors corresponds to the declaration in an ordinary civil action. The plaintiff in error states the "manifest error" found in the lower court judgment and asks that the higher court reverse and annul the judgment. The document was prepared and signed by the attorney for the plaintiff in error only if he had been ordered to assign errors on motion of the defendant in error. These documents are unarranged and unindexed.
|
|
| J2026 |
Assignments of Errors (Geneva), 1829-42. .4 cu. ft.
The contents of this series are similar to J8011.
|
|
| J4013 |
Writs of Mandamus, 1822, 1825-44. .4 cu. ft.
This series consists of writs of mandamus commanding a public officer or public corporation to show cause why he or it should not perform a duty (alternative mandamus) or to perform it (peremptory mandamus). The formal plaintiff in the case is the people of the State of New York "on the relation of" (ex relatione, or ex rel.) a private individual, who is known as the relator. When the relator is the people on its own behalf, the attorney for the plaintiff is the attorney general. In other cases private attorneys represent the relator. The defendants may be judges of a court of common pleas (the majority of cases in this series), sheriffs, town commissioners of highways, judges of a mayor's court, the canal commissioners or canal appraisers, a county board of supervisors, or any other public officer or body. One case (1845) involves a charge that the governor and secretary of state had not distributed surplus volumes of the Natural History of the State of New York as required by law. Most writs of mandamus served on courts of common pleas demanded that the judges perform or vacate a rule, set aside a verdict, or quash an appeal. The return to a writ of mandamus usually includes transcripts of court proceedings, affidavits of public officers, or other documents relating to the action of the public officer or corporation under challenge. The writs of mandamus are unarranged and unindexed. The original office of filing is uncertain because the writs were found estrayed in several different series. The issuance of a writ of mandamus and the proceedings thereon followed the provisions of the Revised Statutes of 1829, Part III, Chap. 9, Title 2, Art. 3.
|
|
| J1025 |
Writs of Certiorari, Error, Habeas Corpus, and Mandamus (Albany, Utica), 1800-47. 9.9 cu. ft.
These Albany and Utica writs have been removed from J0025 Geneva Writs. Additional Utica writs are found in other series. For descriptions of these documents see J0147 Writs of Certiorari, J0031 Writs of Error, J4013 Writs of Mandamus, and J0029 Writs of Habeas Corpus.
|
|
| J8013 |
Writs of Attachment (Utica), 1825-43. .4 cu. ft.
This series consists of writs of attachment ordering a sheriff or coroner to attach a person disobeying a court rule and hold him to appear in court to answer for his contempt. Officers subject to attachment included judges, court clerks, attorneys, sheriffs, witnesses, jurors, and other public officers. The writ was most frequently issued after an incumbent or former sheriff had failed to execute and return a writ of fieri facias, commanding him to levy a judgment on the property of a losing party. The rule for attachment required the defendant (i.e., the sheriff) to give a bond for his appearance, and many of the writs have these bonds enclosed. The series includes a few interrogatories, or lists of questions posed by the serving officer to the sheriff; and a few warrants for the arrest of persons who had refused to appear in court to testify as material witnesses. The plaintiff in an attachment proceeding is the people of the State of New York ex relatione ("on the relation of") the aggrieved party, who is termed the relator. The documents are bundled by term but are otherwise unarranged and unindexed. The series includes some writs from western New York because Laws of 1829, Chap. 42, required that all attachments from that region be filed with the clerk at Utica. Statutory provisions relating to attachment proceedings for contempts are first found in the Revised Statutes of 1829, Part III, Chap. 8, Title 13.
|
|
|
|
