23 Wend. 360 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1840
By the Court, The question about the orchard goes to the jurisdiction of the commissioners and judges. They cannot lay out a road through an orchard of the growth of four years or more, without the
The evidence which was offered and rejected, did not go to the jurisdiction of the judges, and whether they were right or wrong, I do not see how we can review their decision upon this common law certiorari. Our supervisory power over inferior tribunals, by means of this writ, except in cases where special provisions have been made by the legislature, only extends to questions touching the jurisdiction of the subordinate tribunal, and the regularity of its proceedings. If they neither exceed their powers, nor depart from the forms prescribed to them by law, their decision upon the merits of any controversy before them is final and conclusive. Birdsall v. Phillips, 17 Wendell, 464. Prindle v. Anderson, 19 Wendell, 391.
But I feel no difficulty in this case in saying that the judges [ *363 ] decided properly. 'The written application was *sufficiently specific, in giving the termini and general route of the proposed road.
It was necessary for the applicant to specify courses and distances. 1 B.
Proceedings affirmed.