Leaver v. Kilmer

Decision Date25 February 1903
Citation54 A. 817
PartiesLEAVER v. KILMER et al.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

Error to Circuit Court. Monmouth County.

Action by John F. Leaver against Nelson H. Kilmer and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Defendants' brief excluded.

Argued November term, 1902, before GUMMERE, C. J., and VAN SYCKEL FORT, and PITNEY, JJ.

Wesley B. Stout, for plaintiffs in error.

S. A. Patterson, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM. On the call of the list at the opening of the term, it was announced that this cause would be submitted upon briefs. Pursuant to this announcement, copies of the printed case and briefs were filed with the sergeant at arms. It appears, however, upon an inspection of the brief submitted on behalf of the plaintiffs in error, that it is presented by a member of the bar who has not as yet been licensed to practice as a counselor at law. This court will not receive such a brief. The cause stands, therefore, as if, notwithstanding the stipulation to submit it upon briefs under the rule, the plaintiff in error had entirely failed to comply with that stipulation.

The defendant in error is entitled to proceed as if no brief had been filed by his adversary.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • North Laramie Land Co. v. Hoffman
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 10 d4 Março d4 1921
    ...823.) The court properly struck the petition from the files. (Publicity Sect. v. Raye, 98 A. 300; Holzman v. Purdy, 162 N.Y.S. 65; Leaver v. Kilmer, supra; Duyster v. supra). The jurisdiction of this court is invoked by filing a petition in error and praecipe for summons. (Section 4422 Comp......
  • Appley v. Twp. Comm. of Twp. of Bernards
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 18 d5 Setembro d5 1942
    ...only one, the brief would have been rejected, pursuant to well settled rules. Duysters v. Crawford, 69 N.J.L. 229, 54 A. 823; Leaver v. Kilmer, N.J.Sup., 54 A. 817, reversed on other grounds 71 N.J.L. 291, 59 A. 643; Moore v. Borough of Bradley Beach, 87 N.J.L. 391, 395, 94 A. 316; Gadek v.......
  • Fedorka v. City of Bayonne, 312.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 15 d4 Janeiro d4 1931
    ...is not signed by a counselor at law, and hence should not be considered even if the state of the case were before us. Leaver v. Kilmer (N. J. Sup.) 54 A. 817; Duysters v. Crawford, 69 N. J. Law, 229, 54 A. 823; Hazard v. Phoenix Co., 78 N. J. Eq. 568, 80 A. 456; Moore v. Bradley Beach, 67 N......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT