Case ID: njl_3/html/0514-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Pekniítgtoii, J. Kirkpatrick, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[697] [*] CASTNER against CREATOR.
    OH CERTIORARI.
    The action below was an action bn the case; brought by Creator against Castner, for ill-using a mare which Creator had let him to ride. The state of demand set out at considerable length, the circumstances; that the mare was obtained by Castner to ride to a particular place, about 12 miles distance, and was to be returned in 24 hours; but that the defendant went to another place, 40 miles distance, and kept her a week, and used her so ill that she died within three days after she was returned; that the plaintiff was at great trouble in sending after the mare, and in doctoring her after she was returned; that the case was aggravated by-the parties agreeing to leave it to men; and that when the referees met, the defendant refused, by which the plaintiff was put to expense. The plaintiff below recovered $60 damages.
    The principal objection to the judgment was, to the sufficiency to the state of demand. It was also objected, [f ] that the justice overruled legal evidence; but this did not appear on the record.
   Pekniítgtoii, J.

I cannot perceive any substantial reason for reversing the judgment of the justice. The state of demand sets out unnecessary matter; but I think it contains a good cause of action, and that the unnecessary matter may be considered as surplusage; or, perhaps, as inducement to action. If the justice overruled legal testimony, this should have been made to appear. The grievance complained of, is the immoderate use of the mare, by which she was injured, and the plaintiff suffered, and this is sufficiently set out.

Kirkpatrick, C. J.

This is a oertiorari directed to Nicholas Neighbor, Esq., of Morris county. I see no ground for reversal in this record. Some of the errors assigned in the reasons filed, are substantial, but unfortunately for the plaintiff, they do not appear upon the transcript, nor are they in any way verified. Therefore, in my opinion, let judgment be affirmed.

Rossell, J. — Of the same opinion.

Judgment affirmed.