Case Name: Peter Perrine vs. Enoch Cheeseman
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1830-02
Citations: 11 N.J.L. 195
Docket Number: 
Parties: Peter Perrine vs. Enoch Cheeseman.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 11
Pages: 231–232

Head Matter:
Peter Perrine vs. Enoch Cheeseman.
Upon adjudging an appeal bond to be defective, tbe Court of Common Pleas ought to allow the appellant to file another bond witli good security.
L. II. Stockton,
moved for a mandamus to the Court of Common Pleas of Monmouth, to reinstate an appeal. At the instance of the appellee, the court adjudged the original appeal bond to be defective on account of a material alteration by an interlineation not noted. The appellant offered a second bond, of which the court adjudged the security to be insufficient. The appellant thereupon offered to substitute another bond with sufficient security, but the court refused to receive it, and dismissed the appeal.
By all, contra.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The Court of Common Pleas ought to have allowed the last bond to have been substituted. No delay would have been thereby occasioned. The case is within the provision of the fourth section of' the act of November 23d; 1821.
Let a mandamus issue.