By RAY ALDER
Ask Adler
The Indiana Supreme Court was established by the Constitution of the State of Indiana by Convention at Corydon on June 29, 1816.
The first session of the General Assembly, under the state government commenced in Corydon, Ind., on the first Monday in November 1816. In conformity to the provisions of the Constitution the act organizing the Supreme Court was approved on December 23, 1816. The first justices were James Scott, John Johnson and Jesse L. Holman with their commissions bearing the date of December 28, 1816. The first term of the Supreme Court in Indiana began May 5, 1817, and the justices appeared, took their seats and heard the case of M’Dowell v. David which had originated in the general court of the late Indiana territory. Legislation transferred the case to the Supreme Court in their first session. The Supreme Court ordered the papers and the suit be transmitted to the Circuit Court of Warrick County in which the cause of action had accrued. Ind. Stat. 1816, P. 13(1).
In the December term of 1817, it was noted that while the court was on vacation, the Honorable John Johnson had died at his residence in Knox County – a universally esteemed honest man and an independent, intelligent Judge. During that time Isaac Blackford was appointed one of the justices of the court.
In Carty v. Rhea found at 1 Blackford 54 the Court held:
“Copeland under his seal made the following writing: “received of William Ray a certain note, eight pounds, on Moses Ray, which I promise to pay, or deliver said note on or before the 3rd day of April 1814.” William Ray assigned the writing to Thomas Clark and Thomas Clark assigned it to the Plaintiff who, being unable to find Copeland commenced an action of assumpsit against Ray on his assignment.” The court noted “this is not a paper that would come under the usage of merchants in England, from the manner in which it was drawn, being in the alternative to pay money or deliver a note. But, if it would have been subject to the usage of merchants in England as a promissory note, it would not be so in this State.”
A later case was Lambert and Another v. Blackman. The justices noted that it was a case upon a promissory note. They went on to say “the note was in the French language, but was declared on as if it was in English. The variance, at trial was held immaterial. The damages were laid in the Declaration at three hundred dollars ($300.00). The jury gave a verdict for three hundred twenty-two dollars and twenty-eight cents ($322.28) in damages; for which sum, together with costs, judgment was entered during the term.” The court went on to say that one error complained of was that the note, being in the French language, should have been set forth in that language in the declaration rather than in English. The court held that, stating a note in French and the complaint in English was not error.
Most of the original cases were about the collection of money. Piatt v. Eads presented the issue of whether the Law of the Merchant was part of the Common Law of England and, if so, whether inland bills of exchange are governed by that law and whether the Law of Merchant of England is enforced in Indiana. The court went on to say “the whole current of authorities, from the commencement of the history of our system of jurisprudence down to the present day, goes to establish the doctrine that the Custom of Merchants is and always has been regarded as part of the Common Law of England.
These early cases deciding disputes by referring to the Law of England or whether French documents could be translated as opposed to being set forth in French show early Indiana trying to establish its common law and case history on which lawyers now routinely rely on resolving disputes.
Educational material and not legal advice, written by the team at Adler attorneys. Email andrea@noblesvilleattorney.com with questions or comments.