Wall v. Hunt

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Wall v. Hunt

9 N.J.L. 38

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided February 15, 1827·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Chief Justice.

The act of the legislature requires that the nature of the estate which the party grieved has in the premises, should be set out in the complaint. (Rev. Law 350, sec. 7.) Now nothing is more manifest than that the [50]*50estate of the persons making this complaint is not set out. They say they are “ tenants for years or lessors of the same,” that is, either tenants or landlords; but which does not appear. Therefore,

Let the judgment be reversed.

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

Chief Justice.

The act of the legislature requires that the nature of the estate which the party grieved has in the premises, should be set out in the complaint. (Rev. Law 350, sec. 7.) Now nothing is more manifest than that the [50]*50estate of the persons making this complaint is not set out. They say they are “ tenants for years or lessors of the same,” that is, either tenants or landlords; but which does not appear. Therefore,

Let the judgment be reversed.

Wall v. Hunt, 9 N.J.L. 38 (N.J. 1827).

Pincite

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

Opinion

Related