87 N.J.L. 198 | N.J. | 1915
The opinion of the court was delivered by
We agree with the result reached by the Supreme Court but prefer to put the case on a different ground. The District Court gave judgment in favor of the defendant on his notice of recoupment. It is, therefore, vital to determine whether the court had jurisdiction to entertain the recoupment. In his original notice the defendant claimed $630, of which $255 was really a claim for failure of consideration. In his amended notice he claimed $1,190.60, of which $225 seems to be for failure of consideration; and he waived all claim to damage over and above $500. This was necessary in order to bring his claim within the jurisdic
The judgment of the Supreme Court reversing the judgment of the District Court is therefore affirmed. It was proper to order a venire de novo, since the defendant might defend for failure of consideration or might amend his notice of recoupment so as to give the court jurisdiction.
For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chile Justice, S vvay.ze, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Black, Bogert, Yre-DENBURGTT, TeRHUNE, HbPPBNHEIWER, WILLIAMS, JJ. 12.
For reversal—White, J. 1.