Brittin v. Van Camp
This text of 3 N.J.L. 662 (Brittin v. Van Camp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
-The state of demand goes for double damages, which the plaintiff is not intitled to in case of damage done by horses and cattle; but as only single damages were recovered, it might excite a struggle to get over [490]*490this defect in the state of demand. But this would not avail. In case of damage done by horses, cattle, and sheep, if the party intends to recover under the act regulating fences, and to give in evidence the appraisement, he must show in his state of demand, that the act lias been pursued; that his fence was lawful; that the horses, &c. got over, crept through, or broke down the fence, and did damage, and that the appraisers were chosen as the act directs.
See Pat. 338, Sec. 12. Rev. i,, 391.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 N.J.L. 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brittin-v-van-camp-nj-1810.