Torrence v. Van Emburgh
Torrence v. Van Emburgh
3 N.J.L. 106
Opinion of the Court
— Hero was a trial in the absence of the defendant, and no witness examined; the state of demand was not susceptible of proof in any other way than by witnesses, or the confession of the defendant. The defendant not being present, could have made no confession. So that here is a judgment without evidence.
It must therefore be reversed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.