P. H. Laufman & Co. v. Hope Manfacturing Co.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On contract. Defendant is a New Jersey corporation. Summons for $3,000; tested April 22d, 1891; returnable April 30th, 1891; declaration, including bill of particulars and statement of amount claimed, was attached, and a notice to defendant endorsed that an affidavit of merits was required to be filed within ten days after service upon it, and' a- plea in thirty days after such service, in case defendant intended to make a defence.
Read the full summary
On contract. Defendant is a New Jersey corporation. Summons for $3,000; tested April 22d, 1891; returnable April 30th, 1891; declaration, including bill of particulars and statement of amount claimed, was attached, and a notice to defendant endorsed that an affidavit of merits was required to be filed within ten days after service upon it, and' a- plea in thirty days after such service, in case defendant intended to make a defence. Copy of summons, declaration and notice was served1 by the ■sheriff of Gloucester county on the secretary of the defendant company by delivering them to him…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Dixon, J.
The first question in the case is, whether, under the supplement to the Practice act, approved May 3d, 1889 (Pamph. L., p. 334), an affidavit of merits is required from the defendant, to prevent the entry of judgment at the expiration of ten days after service of the declaration and notice to file such affidavit, in cases where the declaration and notice are served at the time of the service of the summons.
Clearly, the first section of the supplement requires such affidavit only when the declaration and notice are served “after the defendant…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Morris Plan Co. of New York v. LorberSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933