Hamilton v. Decker

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Hamilton v. Decker

5 N.J.L. 813

DecidedFebruary 15, 1820

StatusPublished

This text of 5 N.J.L. 813 (Hamilton v. Decker) 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

Hamilton v. Decker, 5 N.J.L. 813 (N.J. 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

STATE of demand in the usual form, in trespass for taking personal property. At the trial, the defendants below offered an execution against one Allingham, and which had been delivered to one of them, as a constable; as evidence to j ustify taking the property. This execution was rejected. And Halsey now assigned its rejection as cause of reversal. Vroom replied, that it was incompetent, until legalized by the production of a judgment. 1 Ld. Ray. 733. 5. Bur. 2631.

The court affirmed the judgment.

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

STATE of demand in the usual form, in trespass for taking personal property. At the trial, the defendants below offered an execution against one Allingham, and which had been delivered to one of them, as a constable; as evidence to j ustify taking the property. This execution was rejected. And Halsey now assigned its rejection as cause of reversal. Vroom replied, that it was incompetent, until legalized by the production of a judgment. 1 Ld. Ray. 733. 5. Bur. 2631.

The court affirmed the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 N.J.L. 813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-decker-nj-1820.