Voorheis v. Kerns

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Voorheis v. Kerns

3 N.J.L. 966

DecidedSeptember 15, 1812

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.J.L. 966 (Voorheis v. Kerns) 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.

Bluebook

Voorheis v. Kerns, 3 N.J.L. 966 (N.J. 1812).

Pincite

Opinion

Pennington, J.

— I am glad to see this certificate. The justice is correct in the idea of his duty; and unless the facts are denied, I am clearly of opinion, that the certiorari be dismissed.

M( Donald, for the plaintiff, could not deny the facts stated by the justice; the plaintiff had expected that the justice would return the writ, and therefore, had not called on him; he now wished for time to procure the return of the writ, with the transcript of the justice.

By the Court.

— If we indulge this practice, ceriioraris will be made use of as instruments of delay.

Writ dismissed.

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

Pennington, J.

— I am glad to see this certificate. The justice is correct in the idea of his duty; and unless the facts are denied, I am clearly of opinion, that the certiorari be dismissed.

M( Donald, for the plaintiff, could not deny the facts stated by the justice; the plaintiff had expected that the justice would return the writ, and therefore, had not called on him; he now wished for time to procure the return of the writ, with the transcript of the justice.

By the Court.

— If we indulge this practice, ceriioraris will be made use of as instruments of delay.

Writ dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.J.L. 966, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/voorheis-v-kerns-nj-1812.