Matlack v. Layman
3 N.J.L. 993
Opinion
— It ought to appear by the return, that the defendants had been summoned, the time the law requires, before the return of the summons. This return is also defective in another respect. The return says, that the summons was served on one of the defendants, not naming him. This is too uncertain. Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Matlack v. Layman, 3 N.J.L. 993 (N.J. 1813).
3 N.J.L. 993 (Matlack v. Layman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.