Justice of the Peace

[suijuris]

Jerseee has recently suggested that our common law remedy may be available before the Justice of the Peace, and I feel that it is something worth investigating.



So, anyone with thoughts or research to contribute on the subject, please reply to this thread.

[suijuris]

The justice of the peace typically presides over a court that hears misdemeanor cases and other small cases of police infractions. The justice of the peace may also have authority over cases involving small debts, landlord and tenant disputes, or other small claims court proceedings. Proceedings before the Justice of the Peace are often faster and less formal than the proceedings in other courts. In some jurisdictions a party convicted or found liable before the Justice of the Peace may have the right to a trial de novo before the judge of a higher court rather than an appeal strictly considered. At least in popular fiction, the Justice of the Peace is the judge to whom parties seeking a quick and informal civil marriage can repair.



In many US states the office of Justice of the Peace has been abolished or transferred to another court, such as the magistrate's court.

[sadie]

The Credit River Decision was decided by a Justice of the Peace in Minnesota.



Each State is different. You should check your Constitution under Judciary and also search on the web for the court system in your state.



Some states that have Justice courts have limitations on the amounts and they operate more like a small claims.



I have seen in my travels on the net, references to Common Law Courts in some areas. They don't have one here in Mississippi so I didn't pursue but I think Pennsylvania has Common Law Court.



You have a right to demand Common Law Docket and Common Law Trial by Jury pursuant to the Constitution Amendment VII. Each state consitution should also have

a section for this as well.

[Jerseee]

Sadie you are correct.



In some states the Justice of the Peace was renamed to be called the Magistrate. However, I do believe each state has to have one ot the other. To not have one at all would be tragic for the state and not to mention unconstitutional. I am not fully positive about this but my research is leading me to think this is the case.



Hopefully I will find something in writing other than the constitution.