Case ID: njl_5/html/0638-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State against the Judges of the Orphans’ Court of the county of Burlington.
    
    ON CERTIORARI.
    Division of mifsioners court set lands noTof6’ the estate set tiuMieirs3 
    
    AT the term of November 1818, Wall, presented two affidavits whereby it appeared, that an application had been to the Orphans’ Court of Burlington, for the appointment of commissioners to divide the real estate of Isaac dec. That they made a division and report on the 11th of February 1818 ; that this report was confirmed m the same month; that the whole of the land set off and divided to Jemima South, one of the heirs, (who was at the time of the division, and still continued an inhabitant of the state of Ohio) and part set off to Rachel Ro*berts and Jane Rossell, was contained in a deed given by said Quigley, on the 21st of November 1780, to Ebenezer Cowell, and that Cowell went into possession of it at the date of the deed, and he and his heirs had continued in possession ever since.
    • Upon these affidavits a certiorari was issued, directing the court to send up the report and order. Upon the return of the writ other affidavits were taken, which proved the facts before stated, and it was moved to set aside the report of the commissioners, upon the ground that they had divided lands not belonging to the estate of Isaac Quigley, and had not given any of his lands, to one of his heirs, and less than their proportion, to two others.
    
      Kinsey objected.
    That the certiorari ought to have been brought within three months; that the objection to the report ought to have been made within three months ; that the adverse claim of Cowell could not be tried here, and must be tried before a decision can be made in favour of Mrs. South; and that chancery had the jurisdiction over this matter.
    
      
      Wall replied;
    that Mrs. South, lived out of the state; that the writ was applied for as soon as could be done, from her situation ; that the division was made in February, the affidavit in August, and the motion in November; that the certiorari must necessarily be issued in three months, only in adversary suits, not in ex parte hearings ; that this was the only mode of reaching the evil; the application here was to the general superintending power of the court, which was sufficient for the purpose.
    
      
      
         See Bellerjeau vs. Real Estate of George Ely, 3 Hal. 273. Stokes vs. Middleton, 4 Dutch. 32. Young vs. Rathbone, 1 C. E. Gr. 225. Den. Richman vs. Baldwin, 1 Zab. 395. S. C. 1 Stock. 394. Van Riper vs. Berdan, 2 Gr. 133. N. J. R. R. Co. vs. Suydam, 2 Har. 62.
      
    
   The court

ordered that the division and report of the commissioners, and the order of the Orphans’ Court, be reversed and made void.