Overseers of Newark v. Overseers of Pompton

3 N.J.L. 1039
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided September 15, 1813·Published

Opinion

By the Court.

There is no pretense of fraud set up in this case. If there was any fraud alleged in the transaction, it would be proper to examine it, and might govern the decision. Kellam, under the state of this case, must be [592]*592considered as seized of a freehold estate of the value of fifty pounds. The judgment of the sessions affirming the order of the justices, must be

Affirmed.

Pennington, J.

Being an inhabitant of Newark delivered no opinion.

Cited in Bernards v. Wrrren, 3 Gr. 447. Approved in Nottingham v. Amwell, 1 Zab. 87.

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

Overseers of Newark v. Overseers of Pompton, 3 N.J.L. 1039 (N.J. 1813).

3 N.J.L. 1039 (Overseers of Newark v. Overseers of Pompton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth ex rel. Bressler v. Gane
3 Grant 447 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1863)