Borst v. Beecker
6 Johns. 332
Opinion
The words of the act (Laws, vol. 1. $ess. 24. c. 165. s. 12. p. 496.) are, that the constable shall summon, as jurors, “ twelve good and lawful men, being freeholders or freemen of such city, or freeholders of such town, where the cause is to be tried,” &c. Though the two jurors objected to were freeholders, they were not “ good and lawful men,” within the meaning of the statute, and, therefore, not competent jurors; The judgment must be reversed.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Borst v. Beecker, 6 Johns. 332 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1810).
6 Johns. 332 (Borst v. Beecker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wassum v. Feeney
121 Mass. 93 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1876)
Walther v. Rabolt
30 Cal. 185 (California Supreme Court, 1866)
Stone v. People
3 Ill. 326 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1840)