¶1— This state of demand is certainly insufficient. The bargain itself ought to have been set out; it is nothing more than saying, you made a bargain with me about a hatter’s shop, which you have not performed. There would not be any safety in going to trial on such an allegation. Judgment reversed.
3 N.J.L. 721
Van Middlesworth v. Dodge
Decided November 15, 1810
Supreme Court of New Jersey · decided 1810-11-15
<p>ON CERTIORARI.</p> <p>The action below, was founded on the following state of demand:—</p> <p>April 4th,-1809. John J.- Van Middlesworth, Dr. to John Dodge, the snm of one hundred dollars for damages, for not complying with the bargain made concerning the hatter’s shop, furs and [*] tools.</p> <p>It was objected that the above state of demand was insufficient.</p>
Decided 1810-11-15