Case ID: njl_2/html/0150-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[119] SATTERLY against BROWN.
    OF CERTIORARI.
    Reversal, demand not to be found.
    The only reasons assigned for the reversal of this judgment, that had any weight in the decision of the court, were,
    1. Because no copy of account, or state of demand, was . delivered to or filed with the justice.
    2. Because the copy of account, or state of demand, if any such there was, is entirely incompetent, illegal and insufficient.
    The justice, in the transcript of his docket, sent up on the return of the certiorari, had stated that the plaintiff below had filed the state of his demand, but it was not sent up; a rule had been made on the justice to send it up. To this rule the justice returned, that [*] there was no state of demand in his possession; and that, according to the best of his recollection and belief, a certain paper filed with him by the plaintiff below, as a state of demand, the contents of which he did not recollect, was delivered to the jury who tried the cause, and was not again returned to him.
    
      Ewing, for plaintiff.
   By the Court.

— It appears to be a hard case on the part of the plaintiff below; but we cannot affirm a judgment without seeing the state of demand; it is the groundwork and foundation of every action; we cannot say that a lawful judgment hath been obtained, until we see the state of demand.

Judgment reversed.

Cited in Powers v. Seeley, 1 Harr. 216. 
      
       Vide ante, *141.