Den v. Driver & Tatem

1 N.J.L. 129
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedNovember 15, 1791
StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.J.L. 129 (Den v. Driver & Tatem) 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 v. Driver & Tatem, 1 N.J.L. 129 (N.J. 1791).

Opinion

Per Cur.

The causes were noticed for trial, first, in May last, by the plaintiffs j second, in September last, by defendants. They went off on the ground of absent witnesses; but, this term, the plaintiffs have not noticed the causes. For this reason, the rules to stay waste must be discharged. One ground of defence in these causes was, that the deed on which plaintiffs claimed was a forgery. The counsel for the defendants moved for leave to inspect it, which was ordered ; and [130]*130that it should be left for that purpose two months in the hands of the Chief Justice.

Note. — Th.e Chief Justice afterwards said that he thought this order was not justifiable by any precedent, and he never would consent to such a thing again.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 N.J.L. 129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/den-v-driver-tatem-nj-1791.