New Jersey Imperial Road Co. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Gloucester County

81 A. 725, 82 N.J.L. 535, 53 Vroom 535, 1911 N.J. LEXIS 254
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided November 20, 1911·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff in error seeks to bring under review an order made by the Supreme Court refusing defendant’s application for a ciiange of venue. It is contended that the action is local in its nature, and that the change of venue asked for by the defendant was a matter of right. We are not called upon to pass upon this question, because it is manifest from the state of the case that the action has not been brought to trial, and that no final judgment has been rendered therein. In Defiance Fruit Co. v. Fox, 47 Vroom 482, the cause had proceeded to final judgment. Our review by writ of error is confined to final judgment. Gen. Stat., p. 1391, § 1; Chambers v. Philadelphia Pickling Co., 52 Vroom, 388; State v. Kelsey, post p. 542.

The writ of error should be dismissed.

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

New Jersey Imperial Road Co. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Gloucester County, 81 A. 725, 82 N.J.L. 535, 53 Vroom 535, 1911 N.J. LEXIS 254 (N.J. 1911).

81 A. 725 (New Jersey Imperial Road Co. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Gloucester County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Engel v. Gosper
177 A.2d 595 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1962)