Case ID: njl_17/html/0344-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Cur :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HOUSTON ET AL. adsm. WOODWARD. 
    
    In case for overflowing lands, &e. Matter of practice, respecting rules-for jury of view.
    
      H. W. Green for the defendant,
    stated, that a rule had heretofore been granted in this cause for a jury of view, but the cause had not been tried at the Circuit to which such jury had been awarded. He now inquired if it was necessary to enter a new rule for a struck jury; the rules of practice being silent upon the subject.
    He suggested that it had been usual to renew the rule in conformity to the practice of the courtsat Westminster Hall. But here the same reason did not exist. In t-he English practice, the rule uniformly specifies the time and place of the view: and therefore it became necessary if the cause was not tried at the next term, to renew the rule. The rule in this court does not specify the time for the view—which is fixed by the sheriff or the attorneys, and there appeared no necessity for a renewal of the rule.
    
      
       Decided orally at September Term, 1839.
    
   Per Cur :

Juries of view are ordered by thi court in pursuance of statute; El. Dig. 268, pl. 11, and when a rule for such a jury is once entered, it continues'in force, until the cause is tried, or the rule discharged.