Potter v. Carman
This text of 3 N.J.L. 521 (Potter v. Carman) 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.
Opinion
This was not proceeding to inquire into the merits of the cause. The justice was very correct in this respect.
[*] It was next contended, that the justice had improperly over-ruled the testimony of the defendant below, who was' the plaintiff in this Court. It appeared by the record of the justice, that this tesfimony was offered to prove a set-off and was rejected on the ground that the defendant had not filed a plea of payment.
By the Court. — This was correct.
It was contended, that the demand below was for a tavern debt; hut it appeared that the tavern act was pleaded, and that a jury had passed on tho account.
By the Court. — -This was a question of fact, and was proper to he tried by a jury.
Judgment affirmed.
The plea of payment, is now rendered unnecessary, by a supplement to the justice’s act, passed 29th Nov. 1809.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 N.J.L. 521, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/potter-v-carman-nj-1809.