Case Name: BLOODGOOD against VANDERVEER
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1812-02
Citations: 3 N.J.L. 928
Docket Number: 
Parties: [676] BLOODGOOD against VANDERVEER.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 486–486

Head Matter:
[676] BLOODGOOD against VANDERVEER.
OH CERTIORARI.
A verdict for a part of penalties sued for, should designate which of them are found.
The action below was brought by Vanderveer .against Bloodgood, for ten penalties for selling spirituous liquors by small measure. The state of demand charged ten several distinct offences. The jury found a general verdict for $40, on which, judgment was rendered.
Hunter, for the plaintiff,
moved the reversal of this judgment, on the ground that the defendant below had not been convicted of any specific offence.

Opinion:
By the Court.
The jury in rendering their verdict ought to have designated the particular offenses which they found against the defendant; and judgment should have been rendered on these specific offenses. This error in a penal action, wherein strictness is required, cannot be got over.
Judgment reversed.