Roberts v. Birgess
20 N.J. Eq. 139
This text of 20 N.J. Eq. 139 (Roberts v. Birgess) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Roberts v. Birgess, 20 N.J. Eq. 139 (N.J. Ct. App. 1869).
Opinion
The complainant having filed a replication, the defendant was bound to prove the usury. Matter not responsive to a bill, but pleaded by way of confession and avoidance, must be established by testimony. The motion to open the decree must, therefore, be denied with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
20 N.J. Eq. 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-v-birgess-njch-1869.