West v. Smith

2 N.J. Eq. 309
CourtNew Jersey Court of Chancery
DecidedApril 15, 1840
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2 N.J. Eq. 309 (West v. Smith) 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
West v. Smith, 2 N.J. Eq. 309 (N.J. Ct. App. 1840).

Opinion

The Chancellor.

The injunction must be dissolved, The complainant has not proceeded with his suit as he ought to have •done. A subpoena in chancery need not necessarily be served by a sheriff or coroner. It may be served by any other competent person ; but in such case there must be an affidavit of the manner and time of service, and upon the return.of the writ a rule must be taken upon the defendant to plead, answer or demur at or before -the next, stated term of the court. It is certainly proper, in all ordinary cases, that the process of the court should be served by the sheriff or-other officer known to the law, but the court has repeatedly sanctioned the service of its process by a private person.

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

Related

Eckel v. Williams
147 A. 109 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1929)
Forstmann, C., Co. v. United Front, C.
133 A. 774 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 N.J. Eq. 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-smith-njch-1840.