State v. Vanderveer

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Vanderveer

7 N.J.L. 38

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided May 15, 1823·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are of opinion, that the case in Southard extends to surveyors; and the great reason why certio[47]*47raris of this kind could not be allowed at chambers, was, that public proceedings should not be interrupted by the allocatur of a single j udge.

Ford J.

I am satisfied that the allocatur was not within the rule laid down in Southard. How far that rule ought to be modified, is another question.

EosselIj J.

had no objection to reconsider that rule, and modify it if thought advisable.

Certiorari quashed.

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

Per Curiam.

We are of opinion, that the case in Southard extends to surveyors; and the great reason why certio[47]*47raris of this kind could not be allowed at chambers, was, that public proceedings should not be interrupted by the allocatur of a single j udge.

Ford J.

I am satisfied that the allocatur was not within the rule laid down in Southard. How far that rule ought to be modified, is another question.

EosselIj J.

had no objection to reconsider that rule, and modify it if thought advisable.

Certiorari quashed.

State v. Vanderveer, 7 N.J.L. 38 (N.J. 1823).

Pincite

7 N.J.L. 38 (State v. Vanderveer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.