Potts v. Hendrickson , 3 N.J.L. 1042 ( 1813 )

By the Court

— The state of demand is wholly deficient; no cause of action is stated; it does not in anyway appear why the Potts are legally obliged to support Garret Cunningham; nor even if they were, why they were hound to pay to the overseers of the poor, what Deborah James had for the purpose of supporting him. There must be some legal cause of action on which to ground a judgment.

Judgment reversed.