
    Crandall vs. Bacon and another.
    
      Justice of the Peace — Loss of jurisdiction by adjournment without specifying time or place — Injunction.
    1. Where a justice of the peace adjourns a cause without specifying the how' of the day or Vast place to which it is adjourned, he loses jurisdiction; and the judgment is void.
    
    2. Such yoid judgment may be reversed by certiorari; but its collection cannot be restrained by injunction.
    
    APPEAL from tbe Circuit -Court for Sauk County.
    This was an appeal by tbe defendants Ira P. and Lyman Bacon, from a judgment of said circuit court, perpetually restraining (for fraud in obtaining it) tbe collection of a judgment rendered by a justice of tbe peace of said county, in favor of Ira P. Bacon against Orandall, which judgment bad been assigned to Lyman Bacon. Ira P. Bacon answered, among other things, that he had no'interest legal or equitable in the judgment at the commencement of the suit, and insisted that the plaintiff’s only remedy was by certiorari. Lyman Bacon answered admitting the rendition of the judgment before the justice, the assignment to him, and that he was the owner of it; but denied all other allegations of the complaint.
    
      Hopkins & Foote, for appellants,
    argued, inter alia, that the judgment being void on its face, equity would not interfere to set it aside. Meloy v. Dougherty, 16 Wis., 269 ; 11 id., 389 ; Van Doren v. The Mayor, Sc., 9 Paige, 388.
    
      G 0. Bemington, for respondent:
    1. This case is a proper one for interference by injunction. 
      Wright v. Eaton, 7 Wis., 595; Blalcesley v. Johnson, 13 id., 530; 1 Waterman’s Eden on Inj., p. 69, note. 2. The appellants cannot evade the injunction on the ground that the proper remedy was by certiorari, (1.) Because they cannot take advantage of their own wrong. (2.) Certiorari would not stay proceedings to collect the justice’s judgment. 3. Lyman Bacon, the real owner of the judgment, sets up no defense that there was any defect in the judgment rendering it void or voidable. There was no question of that kind in the court below, and can be none here. The answer of Ira P. Bacon was in effect a disclaimer of all interest, and could not make for the real parties in interest an issue which they ignored.
   Downer, J.

The judgment of the justice of the peace enjoined by the circuit court was void. The justice adjourned the cause one week, without specifying the hour of the day, or tho> place to which it was adjourned. He thereby lost jurisdiction of the cause. Roberts v. Warren, 3 Wis., 736; Brown v. Kellogg, 17 Wis., 475.

There was a plain, adequate remedy by common law certi-orari to reverse this void judgment.

By the Court.- — -The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint.

A motion for a rehearing was denied.  