Case Name: J. R. Hagaman against G. W. Case
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1817-05
Citations: 4 N.J.L. 370
Docket Number: 
Parties: *J. R. Hagaman against G. W. Case.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 424–424

Head Matter:
*J. R. Hagaman against G. W. Case.
on certiorari.
Book accounts.
No price af fixed to the items.
THIS action was brought for a physician’s bill. The state of demand contained a regular account of items and their prices. At the trial the plaintiff below offered his book in evidence, which contained the articles without any price added or annexed thereto. To its admission, the defendant objected, but the objection was overruled, the book admitted, and no other or further proof of price or value given, or any admission made on the subject. This objection was now taken, among others before this court.
Ewing for plaintiff in certiorari. Wall for defendant.
See Swing vs. Sparks, 2 Hal. 59. Inslee vs. Prall, 3 Zab. 457. Jones vs. DeKay, Pen. *955. Boyles vs. M' Eowen Pen. *677. Bay vs. Cook, 2 Zab. 343. Hedges vs. Boyle, 2 Hal. 68. Smith vs. Dunn, 2 Dutch. 212.

Opinion:
Kirkpatrick C. J.
This book ought not to have been admitted in evidence. It is not a regular book of account. The price or value ought always to be annexed to the article charged. If it be not so, a door is opened to frauds of the most alarming nature.
Rossell J. Absen.
Southard J..
One of two things is manifest in this case; either the state of demand was not a copy of the plaintiff's account, and therefore faulty, or this testimony was not proper to support the state of demand. If the book was at all admissible, it could only be, to shew that the articles charged, had been received by the defendant; but this was not enough; some proof ought to be given of the value of those articles. A jury is not to be left to guess on that subject. There was therefore a failure of evidence and the court should so have informed the jury, and no verdict should have been rendered in favour of the plaintiff.
Judgment reversed.