
    Wilson vs. Burks.
    • 1. It can make no difference for wbat reason the writ of certiorari was dismissed in this case; the court did right in dismissing the same, and affirming the judgment of the justice.
    2. A plaintiff brought suit in a justice’s court. He testified that he purchased of the defendant the furniture ánd fixtures of a barber shop for $110; that he paid $30 thereof; that subsequently the defendant came and took from him the said property, and this suit was brought for the amount which had been paid. The defendant testified that he sold to plaintiff the property mentioned for the sum stated ; that he was to retain the title until payment was made; that plaintiff had the property over a year, and the rent or hire was worth $69.00 when he re-tookpossession; this amount defendant set off against plaintiff’s claim:
    
      Held, that under plaintiff’s own testimony, when he suffered the property to be re-taken by the defendant, and affirmed this taking by bringing Ms action-for the money which he had paid, this was a rescission of the contract of sale, and the defendant became liable for the money which plaintiff had paid him; and the claim was subject to a set-off for the value of the hire or rent of the furniture. A. like result would be reached from the testimony of either side.
    [This writ of certiorari was dismissed by the court, on the ground that appeal to a jury was the proper remedy to correct the errors of the justice who tried the case.]
    September 25, 1883.
   Judgment affirmed.

Blandeord, Justice.  