Seabury & Johnson v. Bolles
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On error to the Supreme Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Beasley, Chief Justice.
Upon the legal merits of the case, this court agrees in all respects with the views expressed in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court. Nor do we think that the subject requires any further discussion.
But, notwithstanding this concurrence, the judgment must, be altered. The defect which we think illegalizes it as it exists is, that it includes the costs of the plaintiff in certiorari. The judgment removed by the writ had been rendered in the District Court, and the statute declares that in such case there shall be no costs allowed the plaintiff in certiorari in the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Cobb v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- C. E. Johnson & Co. v. MarshSupreme Court of Vermont · 1940
- Sheldon v. BigelowSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Harmon v. National Supply Co. of KansasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Mendonca v. RussellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.