Case law

Nixon v. Walter

41 N.J. Eq. 103 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1886

It was held, in Scratton v. … In Cook v. McClure, 58 N.

Stratton v. Allen

16 N.J. Eq. 229 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1863

Turnpike Road v. Myers, 6 Serg. & R. 12; Gordon v. Preston, 1 Watts 385 ; Central Railroad v. Claghorn, 1 Speer’s Eq. … Everett v. Stone, 3 Story 453 ; Arnold v. Maynard, 2 Story 354 ; Curtis v. Leavitt, 1 Smith 111 ; Freeman v. Deming, 3 Sandf. Ch. R. 332.

Camden Trust Co. v. Leaming

142 N.J. Eq. 328 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 29, 1948

The decisions already cited, principally, Wilkinson v. Sherman, supra [ 45 N.J. Eq. 413 ]; Cantine v. Brown, supra [ 46 N.J. Law 599 ]; Cain v. Belden, supra [ 93 N.J. Eq. 567 ]; Tantum v. Campbell, supra [ 83 N.J. … Justice Heher, in his recent opinion in Ricardo v. Kelly, 134 N.J. Law 540 ; 48 Atl.

Martling v. Martling

47 N.J. Eq. 122 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1890

Pitney, V. C. … The cases are collected and reviewed in Garnsey v. Mundy, 9 C. E. Gr. 243; Mulock v. Mulock, 4 Stew. Eq. 594; and in Russell’s Appeal, 75 Pa. St. 269; 2 Lead. Cas. Eq. (notes to Huguenin v. Baseley) 1156.

Lister v. Weeks

60 N.J. Eq. 215 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 17, 1900

He testified that he stated what he had so heard at the February or March meeting of the board. He further testified that it was Mr. … Holcomb v. Coryell, 1 Beas. 289. There is another ground upon which the trustee should be-removed. In May v. May, 167 U. S. 310 , Mr.

Toppin v. Moriarty

59 N.J. Eq. 115 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 23, 1899

Stevens, V. C. … The work was completed in November, 1896, and the complainant, having procured from the board of health a permit to remove the body,. was about to disinter it, when the cemetery authorities were notified by Mr.

Stanford v. Lyon

37 N.J. Eq. 94 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1883

Supervisors, 46 Barb. 659 ; Gray v. Ayres, 7 Dana 375; Ely v. Supervisors, 36 N. Y. 297 ; Brown v. Perkins, 12 Gray 89 ; State v. Paul, 5 R. I 185; Miller v. Burch, 32 Tex. 208 ; Chenango Bridge v. Paige, 83 N. … Koch, 2 Brown (Mich.) 119. *100 The injunction being removed, the defendants completed the *101 construction of their building.

Creech v. McVaugh

140 N.J. Eq. 272 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 18, 1947

Birdsall v. Applegate, 20 N.J. Law 244 ; Graydon v. Graydon, 25 N.J. Eq. 561 ; Woodruff v. White , *Page 280 78 N.J. Eq. 410 ; affirmed by this court in 79 N.J. Eq. 225 ; Areson v. Areson, 3 Den. 458 .'" … This was one of the reasons given for assuming jurisdiction in Brown v. Fidelity Union Trust Co., 128 N.J. Eq. 197 ; 15 Atl. Rep. 2d 788. (f) Estate assets in the hands of a former fiduciary are missing.

Borcherling's v. Trefz

40 N.J. Eq. 502 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1885

V. 34; Fellows v. Longyor, 91 N. Y. 324 ; Ballinger y. Bourland, 87 III. 513; Boylston v. Bain, 90 III. 283; Payne v. Newcomb, 100 III. 611; Meets y. Stevens, 106 III. 549; Brigham v. Myers, 51 Iowa 397 ; Bickey v. … Brown, 56 Iowa 486 ; E-ickson v. Bell, 53 Iowa 627 ; Acheson v. Chase, 28 Minn. 211 ; Jordan v. Humphrey, 31 Minn. 495 ; New England Mortgage Co. v. Hendrickson, 13 Neb. 157 ; Austin v.

Belsky v. Loeffler

120 N.J. Eq. 352 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 5, 1936

The irons were on or near a wooden pressing board or a work table and close to a wooden partition in the workroom, in which were hanging many light and inflammable dresses. … In Carlay v. Liberty Hat Manufacturing Co., 81 N.J. Law 502 , it was held that this statute was remedial, and therefore should be liberally construed.

Clausen v. Leary

113 N.J. Eq. 324 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 14, 1933

Thomas v. Scheible, 91 N.J. Eq. 451 . … Wills § 1037; Finlay v. King's Lessee, 28 U.S. 346 ; Wheeler v. Walker, 2 Conn. 196 ; Fox v. Phelps, 17 Wend. (N.Y.) 393; Barruso v. Madan, 2 Johns. (N.Y.) 145.

Young v. Vough

23 N.J. Eq. 325 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1873

Wright v. Morley, 11 Ves. 23; Robinson v. Wilson, 2 Madd. 569; Cheesebrough v. Millard, 1 Johns. Ch. 413 ; Hayes v. Ward, 4 Johns. Ch. 130 ; Clason v. Morris, 10 Johns. R. 524; Story’s Eq. Jur., § 638. … But if he did this only to blind such stockholders as objected to his owning more than one hundred shares, or for the purpose of having a pliant tool in the board, he is not estopped; he must have done it for the purpose

Rockaway, C., Corp. v. D., L. W.R.R. Co.

101 N.J. Eq. 192 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 21, 1927

Mason v. Ross, supra. … Justice Brown, in delivering the opinion in affirmance, said (at p. 475 ): "It may, notwithstanding the case of Brearley v.

Rogosin v. City Trust Co. of Passaic

107 N.J. Eq. 79 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 18, 1930

When said account was opened a copy of a resolution adopted by the board of directors of the corporation relating to the withdrawal of funds from said account was filed with the trust company. … In Butler v.

Hankinson v. Hankinson

33 N.J. Eq. 66 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1880

She returned for a day (to get some money to pay her board in Maryland, she says), but did not go to see him, nor inform him, or 'attempt to inform him, in any way, of her presence in Trenton. … Moores v. Moores, 1 C. E. Gr. 275; Bowlby v. Bowlby, 10 C. E. Gr. 406; S. C. on appeal, Id. 570; Belton v. Belton, 11 C. E. Gr. 449; Taylor v. Taylor, 1 Stew. Eq. 207. The petition will be dismissed.

Doscher v. Schroder

105 N.J. Eq. 315 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 9, 1929

In Capasso v. Colonna, 95 N.J. … There may be extreme cruelty present in this case, but this is not an application to dissolve the marriage for that cause under the act of 1923, P.L. p. 494; nor is it a petition for a divorce from bed and board, Rudin v.

Knickerbocker Trust Co. v. Carteret Steel Co.

79 N.J. Eq. 501 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 13, 1912

Brown, 1 Mas. 191 ; S. C. on appeal, 4 Wheat. 255 ; Nairn v. Prowse, 6 Ves. 752, and Capper v. Spottiswoode, Taml. 21. In that case the vendee gave his note to the vendor payable-at thirty days. … Citing Harris v. Hanie, 37 Ark. 348 ; Young v. Harris, 36 Ark. 168 ; Plowman v. Riddle, 14 Ala. 169 ; Deason v. Taylor, 53 Miss. 697 ; Beal v. Harrington, 116 Ill. 113 ; Mackreth v. Symmons, 1 White & T. Lead.

In Re Hague

105 N.J. Eq. 134 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Aug 27, 1929

Kilbourn v. Thompson, supra; State v. Guilbert, 75 Ohio St. 1 ; Greenfield v. Russel, 292 Ill. 392 . … In Boyd v.

Ames v. Bank of Nutley

118 N.J. Eq. 228 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 27, 1935

Ames set forth the refusal of the board of directors of the bank to further repurchase the bonds and the reason therefor. … Capron v. Luchars, 110 N.J. Eq. 338 ; affirmed, 112 N.J. Eq. 373 .

Giberson v. First Nat. Bk., Spring Lake

100 N.J. Eq. 502 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1927

Chaddock v. VanNess, 35 N.J. Law 517 ; Johnson v. Ramsey, 43 N.J. Law 279 ; Remington v. Wright, 43 N.J. Law 451 ; Anthony v. Fritts, 45 N.J. Law 1 ; Stiles v. Vandewater, 48 N.J. Law 67 ; Foley v. … There is no allegation in the bill or accompanying affidavits that the cashier of the defendant bank had been authorized by the board of directors to enter into the contract alleged.