Executors of Smith v. Burnet

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Executors of Smith v. Burnet

17 N.J. Eq. 40

DecidedFebruary 15, 1864

StatusPublished

This text of 17 N.J. Eq. 40 (Executors of Smith v. Burnet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Executors of Smith v. Burnet, 17 N.J. Eq. 40 (N.J. Ct. App. 1864).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

To a scire facias upon a decree, the defendant sets up payment as a defence. The decree, its assignment to the party in whose favor the scire facias is sued out, and that a balance was due upon the decree at the time of its assignment, are clearly proved. The proof of payment is not satisfactory. The burden of proof is upon the defendant. The defence fails.

The court is asked to postpone a.decision, upon the ground that the defendant now is, and for some years past has been, in one of the southern states. The scire facias was issued in July, 1860. The cause has been long pending, and I see no legal ground for postponement, or even for the exercise of the discretion of the court in permitting further delay.

The party is entitled to. have satisfaction of the decree.

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

The Chancellor.

To a scire facias upon a decree, the defendant sets up payment as a defence. The decree, its assignment to the party in whose favor the scire facias is sued out, and that a balance was due upon the decree at the time of its assignment, are clearly proved. The proof of payment is not satisfactory. The burden of proof is upon the defendant. The defence fails.

The court is asked to postpone a.decision, upon the ground that the defendant now is, and for some years past has been, in one of the southern states. The scire facias was issued in July, 1860. The cause has been long pending, and I see no legal ground for postponement, or even for the exercise of the discretion of the court in permitting further delay.

The party is entitled to. have satisfaction of the decree.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 N.J. Eq. 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/executors-of-smith-v-burnet-njch-1864.