Den ex dem. Rossell v. Inslee

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Den ex dem. Rossell v. Inslee

7 N.J.L. 347

DecidedFebruary 15, 1800

StatusPublished

This text of 7 N.J.L. 347 (Den ex dem. Rossell v. Inslee) 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

Den ex dem. Rossell v. Inslee, 7 N.J.L. 347 (N.J. 1800).

Pincite

Opinion

Kinsey, O. J.

The third section of the act of June last extends not only to issues hereafter to be joined, but embraces in its very terms “ every issue which hath been or shall be joined,” and it expressly directs the trial to be had in the proper' county, unless the Supreme Court shall think proper to order a trial at bar. This power, however, [417]*417is expressly limited to actions in whicli “ the property or matter in dispute shall be of the value of three thousand dollars.” The language of the act is preciso and imperative, and we cannot allow a dispensation from its provisions in any case.

Rule refused.

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

Kinsey, O. J.

The third section of the act of June last extends not only to issues hereafter to be joined, but embraces in its very terms “ every issue which hath been or shall be joined,” and it expressly directs the trial to be had in the proper' county, unless the Supreme Court shall think proper to order a trial at bar. This power, however, [417]*417is expressly limited to actions in whicli “ the property or matter in dispute shall be of the value of three thousand dollars.” The language of the act is preciso and imperative, and we cannot allow a dispensation from its provisions in any case.

Rule refused.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 N.J.L. 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/den-ex-dem-rossell-v-inslee-nj-1800.