Duysters v. Crawford

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Duysters v. Crawford

54 A. 823, 69 N.J.L. 229, 1903 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 193

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedFebruary 24, 1903

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 54 A. 823 (Duysters v. Crawford) 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

Duysters v. Crawford, 54 A. 823, 69 N.J.L. 229, 1903 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 193 (N.J. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

. On the call of the list, at the opening of the term, it was announced that this cause would be submitted upon briefs. Pursuant to. this announcement copies of. the printed case and briefs were filed with the sergeant-at-arms. It appears, however, upon an inspection of the brief submitted on behalf of the plaintiff in error, that it is presented by a member of tlie bar who has not, as yet, been licensed to practice as a [230]*230counselor-at-law. This court will not receive such a brief. The cause stands, therefore, as if, notwithstanding the stipulation to submit it upon briefs, under the rule,, the plaintiff in error had entirely failed to comply with that stipulation.

The defendant in error is entitled to proceed as if no brief had' been filed by dris adversary.

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

Per Curiam,

. On the call of the list, at the opening of the term, it was announced that this cause would be submitted upon briefs. Pursuant to. this announcement copies of. the printed case and briefs were filed with the sergeant-at-arms. It appears, however, upon an inspection of the brief submitted on behalf of the plaintiff in error, that it is presented by a member of tlie bar who has not, as yet, been licensed to practice as a [230]*230counselor-at-law. This court will not receive such a brief. The cause stands, therefore, as if, notwithstanding the stipulation to submit it upon briefs, under the rule,, the plaintiff in error had entirely failed to comply with that stipulation.

The defendant in error is entitled to proceed as if no brief had' been filed by dris adversary.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A. 823, 69 N.J.L. 229, 1903 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duysters-v-crawford-nj-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack