Case ID: njl_2/html/0252-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

W. and J. PARKER against CRAMMER.
    ON CERTIORARI.
    On suit for debt of ancestor, the process must show defendants to be his legal representatives.
    
      In April, 1799, Joseph Parker, father of the plaintiffs in this court, confessed a judgment before Justice Pharo, of Monmouth county, in favor of Benjamin Paul. This judgment had been assigned to William Crammer, the defendant in this court, in April, 1807. In May following, Joseph Parker being dead, Crammer took out a citation in the nature of a soire faoias, from Moses Robins, esquire, of Burlington county, calling on the plaintiffs in certiorari, the sons of Joseph Parker, deceased, to show cause why judgment should not be entered against them, and execution in favor of Crammer, the assignee of the judgment. It does not appear that the Parkers appeared before the justice at all; but they sent their plea, 1st, that they owed-the plaintiff nothing; and 2d, the statute of limitations. The justice, on the production of a transcript from [*] Justice Pharo’s docket, with an assignment thereof, gave judgment against the sons of Joseph Parker, deceased, in favor of Crammer, the assignee. Various objections were taken to this singular and unusual proceeding on the part of the plaintiffs in oertiorari, the Parkers.
    
      Tucker, for plaintiff.
    The court took notice of but one error in the record of the •justice, to wit: That it did not appear in the citation, summons, soire faoias, or whatever name the process might be called, nor in any other of the proceediugs, that the plaintiffs in this court were the legal representatives of Joseph Parker, deceased, or in any way liable to pay his debts; and on that ground
   Reversed the judgment.

Distinguished in Thompson v. Harvey, 2 Penn. 895.

Cited in Inslee v. Flagg, 2 Dutch. 368.