Bayard v. Singleton

Summary

The court refused to dismiss a suit under a statute requiring dismissal when the defendant held title from a commissioner of forfeited estates, holding the statute unconstitutional because it deprived citizens of their right to trial by jury. The court emphasized that the Constitution is fundamental law that the legislature cannot alter or repeal. The underlying dispute concerned title to property formerly owned by Samuel Cornell, a British subject who had conveyed it to his daughter.

Holdings

1. The statute could not constitutionally require dismissal of the plaintiffs' action without a trial; the defendant's motion to dismiss was therefore overruled.
2. The legislature could not require a citizen to stand condemned in property without a trial by jury.
3. Any disabilities personally incurred by the persons from whom the plaintiffs derived title were personal and did not transfer to the plaintiffs by descent or purchase.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the statute requiring dismissal of a property action upon the defendant's affidavit of title through a forfeiture commissioner was consistent with the Constitution.
2. Whether the legislature could deprive a citizen of a judicial determination of property rights by jury trial.
3. Whether the plaintiffs could be barred from prosecuting the action based on disabilities allegedly incurred by persons from whom they derived title.

Disposition

other