Case ID: njl_56/html/0339-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN D. WALLACE, OVERSEER, &c., PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ALFRED A. BRADSHAW, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
    On error to the Supreme Court. For opinion of Supreme Court, see 24 Vroom 315.
    For the plaintiff in error, Thomas F. French.
    For the defendant in error, David J. Pancoast and Martin P. Gft'ey.
    
   Per Curiam.

Without expressing any opinion upon other matters considered and decided by the Supreme Court, we affirm the judgment of that court upon the ground taken in its opinion, that it has not been made to appear that any apportionment of the labor required among the inhabitants of the township, in the same proportion with the tax for the support of government,” was made as the statute contemplates. Rev.,.p. 1006, § 52. Such an apportionment must precede the calling out to work, so that each person of whom work is demanded may know the extent of his duty, and that its performance is justly required of him.

For affirmance—The Chancellor, Abbett, Depue, Lippincott, Mague, Reed, Van Syokel, Bogert, Brown, Clement, Krueger, Phelps, Smith. 13.

For reversal—None.