Case ID: njl_3/html/0138-03.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

[*] HERITAGE against DANIELS, Assignee of Hewes.
    ON CERTIORARI.
    Filing note as the state of demand, illegal.
    Daniels was the plaintiff below, and Heritage the defendant. On the return day of the summons, the justice made the following entry on his record. Plaintiff appeared, proved and filed a note of hand, drawn in favor of Daniel Hewes, by the above defendant] for forty-five dollars, dated 17 June, 1809. Defendant not appearing, judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff; (after examining the note filed) for forty-five dollars and twenty-five cents debt, and fifty-three cents costs of suits, in the absence of the defendant. It also appeared by the return of the justice, that there was an assignment indorsed on the note, from Hewes to Daniels. The objection raised to the proceedings below; was that,
    1st. No state of demand was filed, and
    2d. There was a trial and judgment without evidence.
   By the Court.

Both of these objections have been repeatedly adjudged sufficient ground for the reversal of the judgment of the justice. Filing a note or other evidence of a ground of action, is not filing a state of demand; nor had the justice legal evidence of the execution of the note, nor of the assignment.

Judgment reversed.