 | Great Britain. Court of Common Pleas - 1854
...the argument of Peacock v. Bell, 1 Saund. 74 (see 1 Wms. Saund. 74 a),—" The rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the...court, but that which specially appears to be so;" " nothing shall be intended to be within the jurisdiction of an inferior court but that which is so... | |
 | 1856
...delivered the opinion, quoted with approbation the rule to be found in Peacock v. Bell, (1 Saund. 73), " that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction...court, but that which specially appears to be so ; and nothing shall be intended to be within the jurisdiction of an inferior court but that which is expressly... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Common Pleas, James Manning, Thomas Colpitts Granger, John Scott - 1846
...in writing. The rule laid down in the argument of Peacock v.Bell(e), — " The rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the...superior court, but that which specially appears to be so ;" " nothing shall be intended to be within the jurisdiction of an inferior court but that which is... | |
 | John Pitt Taylor - 1858 - 1675 pągines
...presumptions are also made in favour of judicial proceedings. Thus, it is an undoubted rule of pleading, that, nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior court but that which is so expressly alleged; and consequently the records in the Courts of Counties Palatine, they being... | |
 | Rollin Carlos Hurd - 1858 - 677 pągines
...rules have been suggested, some of which are well settled. It is a well established and leading rule, that, " Nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior court except that which specially appears to be so ; on the contrary, nothing shall be intended to be within... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1874
...Peacock v. Bell,] in ID Car. II. 'The rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to bo out of the jurisdiction of a superior court but that which specially appears to be so.' This, too, was said of a county court, which though inferior to the KB, yet say the court, ' that does... | |
 | South Carolina. Court of Appeals, J. S. G. Richardson - 1867
...in England, where it has been held, without question, that nothing shall be intended to be without the jurisdiction of a superior Court but that which specially appears to be so ; and nothing shall be intended to be within the jurisdiction of an inferior Court but that which is expressly... | |
 | John H. Colby - 1868
...in New York has no authority to administer an oath in Canada.7 The general rule as to jurisdiction is that nothing shall be intended to be out of the...jurisdiction of an inferior court but that which is so expressly alleged.5 A mere voluntary oath is not perjury. Thus, perjury cannot be assigned of a... | |
 | John H. Colby - 1868
...in New Yori has no authority to administer an oath in Canada,7 The general rule as to jurisdiction is that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior court but thai which specially appears to be so, and on the contrary, nothing shall be intended to be within... | |
| |
The rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior court but that which specially appears to be so ; and, on the contrary, nothing shall be intended to be within the jurisdiction of an inferior court... 
