Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1838

Maires v. Smith

Maires v. Smith
Supreme Court of New Jersey · Decided February 15, 1838 · Hornblower, Ryersost
16 N.J.L. 360

Maires v. Smith

Opinion of the Court

Hornblower, C. J.

The objection to the summons is not well founded. The return day being in figures is not cause for reversal. The case of Ross v. Ward, was one in which the summons was unintelligible. The constable’s return, in this case, is good, and complete.

There is no valid objection to the state of demand. The services appear to have been for the defendant below..

The party’s forgetting the time and place of trial, is not a matter of surprise in legal contemplation. This Court cannot interfere merely because the judgment is for too much; this is not a Court of equity; it can only reverse for error. The judgment must be affirmed.

Ford, J. Concurs.

Concurring Opinion

Ryersost, J.

I concur in affirming the judgment. It appears that the defendant below, rejected a fair offer to submit the ease to arbitrators; he is therefore the less entitled to sympathy here.

Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.