Chidester v. Drake

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Chidester v. Drake

3 N.J.L. 903

DecidedNovember 15, 1811

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.J.L. 903 (Chidester v. Drake) 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.

Bluebook

Chidester v. Drake, 3 N.J.L. 903 (N.J. 1811).

Pincite

Opinion

Pennington, J.

— The first, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth errors assigned, are not supported by the [*] record. The second and fourth, state no cause of reversal, even if true. The third, complains of insufficiency in the state of demand, which consists of a single charge, of a balance on [658]*658settlement of account, on or about the 29th December, 1810, $$30 04, 'which is fully sufficient. I am of opinion, that judgment be affirmed.

Munyan, Attorney for plaintiff. The other Judges concurred.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pennington, J.

— The first, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth errors assigned, are not supported by the [*] record. The second and fourth, state no cause of reversal, even if true. The third, complains of insufficiency in the state of demand, which consists of a single charge, of a balance on [658]*658settlement of account, on or about the 29th December, 1810, $$30 04, 'which is fully sufficient. I am of opinion, that judgment be affirmed.

Munyan, Attorney for plaintiff. The other Judges concurred.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.J.L. 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chidester-v-drake-nj-1811.