Alderman v. Diament
Supreme Court of New Jersey
A judgment on a bond and warrant of attorney had been entered against Alderman, Bateman and Bateman, in favor of Diament, at the last term.
1Opinion of the Court
Kirkpatrick, O. J.
The practice of this court has been, in cases of this kind, to open the judgment and let the party go to trial upon the merits, and to plead any plea he thought proper, except a mere dilatory plea. I think, therefore, the defendants would be at liberty to plead non est factum, and, indeed, I think that these judgments entered upon bonds and warrants of attorney should, upon proper application, be very readily and widely opened, for the method in which they are entered is the loosest way of binding a man’s property that ever was devised in any civilized country.
Ford, J.,…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Isbell v. County of SonomaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Friendly Consumer Discount Co. v. FoellNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
- Rhoads v. MitchellSuperior Court of Delaware · 1946
- Architectural Cabinets, Inc. v. GasterSuperior Court of Delaware · 1971
- Hickory Grill, Inc. v. Admiral Trading Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.