Credit River Case
Credit River Case
Credit River Case
Martin V. Mahoney was a justice of the peace in Scott County, Minnesota in the 1960s.
The 1967/1968 Minnesota Legislative Manual states:
"Justices of the peace are elected for two-year terms in townships and
in cities and villages which do not have municipal courts. Justices of the
peace have jurisdiction over actions arising within a county when the
amount involved does not exceed $100 for civil cases, and when the
punishment or fine does not exceed $100 or three months'
imprisonment in criminal cases."
The Minnesota State Court System in 1968
Because the decisions of the justice of the peace courts carry no mandatory authority
(that is, there are no lower courts that would have to follow them), they are not
published.
Jerome Daly was an attorney in Minnesota and also the defendant in an unlawful
detainer action in the justice of the peace court in Credit River Township (Scott County)
where Martin V. Mahoney was the justice of the peace. In this case, First National Bank
of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly, the bank was seeking possession of property that it
had already foreclosed the mortgage on. The jury decided against the bank. The
landowner's defense had been that the bank had not lent him any actual money, but
had simply created credit on its books, and therefore, since nothing of value had been
advanced by the bank, it was not entitled to the property that had been given as
security for the loan. Although Daly did not ultimately prevail, this case has been
celebrated by many of those groups and individuals that practice "law on the edge" as
Although the stay order of Justice Peterson was served on the justice of
the peace and Mr. Daly on July 11, 1969, they intentionally and
deliberately disregarded it in this way: On July 14, 1969, the justice of
the peace, upon motion of Mr. Daly, entered findings of fact,
conclusions of law, and an order for judgment in favor of Zurn. In
response to our order of August 12, 1969, directing the justice of the
peace and Mr. Daly to show cause why they should not be held in
constructive contempt of the Supreme Court of Minnesota for this
conduct, Mr. Daly appeared personally in his own behalf before this
court on August 21. He advised the court that he had been authorized
to represent the justice of the peace in the proceedings. After noting
that he was making a special appearance, Mr. Daly, an attorney at law
admitted to practice in this state, acknowledged that both he and the
justice of the peace intentionally violated the order of Justice Peterson
because in their opinion neither this court nor Justice Peterson had
jurisdiction to issue it.
DISCLAIMER: As librarians and not lawyers, we can suggest resources but cannot give legal advice (such
as which form to file), or legal opinions, (such as how a statute might apply to particular facts.) To do so
could be considered the unauthorized practice of law. Even though we try to suggest materials that will
be of help, further research is usually required to find a complete and correct answer. For many
questions, the best answer may be to consult an attorney. For links to resources on finding an
attorney click here.
• Legal Topics