Case law

Bridgeton Nat. Bank v. Commercial, C., Co.

117 N.J. Eq. 371 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 27, 1934

The resolution of the board of directors of Eastern States recited in the assignment was adopted March 2d 1929. … Portuguese-American Bank v. Welles, 242 U.S. 7 ; 61 L.Ed. 116 ; Burnett v. Jersey City, 31 N.J. Eq. 341 ; United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Newark, 76 N.J. Eq. 230 .

Boyce v. Boyce

19 N.J. Misc. 143 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 30, 1940

In Hughes v. Hughes, 125 N. J. Eq. 47; 4 Atl. … Redrow v. Sparks, 75 N. J. Eq. 396 (at p. 398); 72 Atl. Rep. 442 ; Robins v. Robins, 103 N. J. Eq. 26; 142 Atl. Rep. 168 ; Gasteiger v. Gasteiger, 5 N. J. Mis. R. 315, 136 Atl. Rep. 497 .

Hudson Trust & Savings Institution v. Carr-Curran Paper Mills Co.

58 N.J. Eq. 59 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 11, 1899

In the .case of Hopper v. … The leading authorities in this state are Campbell v. Roddy, 17 Stew. Eq. 244 ; Leatherbury v. Connor, 25 Vr. 172 ; Palmateer v. Robinson, 31 Vr. 433 , and General Electric Co. v. Transit Equipment Co., 12 Rich. Ch.

Armstrong v. Ebener

46 N.J. Eq. 457 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1890

The subject is discussed by Lord Cairns, in Atwood v. Maude, L. R. (3 Ch. App.) 369, where he *466 cites and approves the language of Lord Cottenham, in Hirst v. … Jur. §§ 472, 474; Newton v. Rowse, 1 Vern. 460; Freeland v. Stansfeld, 2 Sm. & G. 479, 1 Jur. (N. S.) 8, 23 L. J. (N. S.) Ch. 923. The same principle was applied in this court in the case of Crimmins v. Crimmins, 13 N.

McMichael v. Webster

54 N.J. Eq. 478 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1896

Pitney, V. C. … With regard to the use and occupation of the premises, I hold that it is a mere matter of offset, and cannot come in here under the ruling of the court of errors and appeals in Coriell v. Brown, 5 Dick. Ch.

McVoy v. Baumann

93 N.J. Eq. 360 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 18, 1922

Justice Brown in. Roller v. Holly, 176 U. S. 398 (at p. 405). In Arndt v. … In Felch v.

Savings Investment, C., Co. v. Associated, C.

122 N.J. Eq. 95 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 5, 1937

Manigault v. Springs, 199 U.S. 473 ; 26 Sup. Ct. 127 ; 50 L.Ed. 274 ; Union Dry Goods Co. v. Georgia Public Service Corp., 248 U.S. 372 ." The statute involved in Hourigan v. … Later, in State Board of Milk Control v. Newark Milk Co., 118 N.J.

McAllister v. McAllister Coal Co.

120 N.J. Eq. 394 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 5, 1936

Watson v. Murray, 23 N.J. Eq. 257 ; Todd v. Rafferty, 30 N.J. Eq. 260 ; Minzesheimer v. Doolittle, 60 N.J. Eq. 394 ; Gregory ads. Wilson, 36 N.J. Law 315 ; Hope v. Linden Park Association, 58 N.J. Law 627 ; Wyckoff v. … Rogers v. New Jersey Insurance Co., 4 Halst. 167; Broadway Bank v. McElrath, 2 Beas. 24; affirmed in Hunterdon County Bank v. Nassau Bank, 2 C.E. Gr. 496; Mount Holly Co. v. Ferree, 2 C.E. Gr. 117; Prall v.

Grey v. Greenville & Hudson Railway Co.

59 N.J. Eq. 372 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 17, 1900

Pr. (6th ed.) *11, citing, inter al., Attorney-General v. East India Co., 11 Sim. 385, 388; Attorney-General v. Cockermouth Local Board, L. R. 18 Eq. 172, 179 (1874); Attorney-General v. Vivian, 1 Russ. 226. … Justice Dixon, in Akers v.

Schultze v. Schultze

73 N.J. Eq. 14 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 28, 1907

Schultze went *17 and took board or rooms in a house, the rear of which backed up on the rear of the house in which her husband was living, so that she could see and watch her children playing in the back yard. … Pitney, V. C.

McKnight's Executors v. Walsh

23 N.J. Eq. 136 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1872

In Harvey v. Harvey, 2 P. W. 21; Pierpoint v. Cheney, 1 P. W. 493; Lanoy v. Athol, 2 Atk. 447; Petre v. Petre, 3 Atk 511, no application was made of this rule, but it was stated as the rule of the Court of Chancery. … Jur., § 1277; Hill on Trustees, *372, *375; Lewin on Trusts 361, 363, 364; Perry *147 on Trusts, § 471; Raphael v. Boehm, 11 Ves. 92; William v. Powell, 15 Beav. 461; Schieffelin v. Steward, 1 Johns. Ch. 620 ; Barney v.

Willoughby v. Chicago Junction Railways & Union Stock Co.

50 N.J. Eq. 656 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1892

In Gaskell v. … Several cases have been cited in this connection, notably that of the Stock Exchange v. Board of Trade, 127 Ill. 153 .

Atwater v. Baskerville

89 N.J. Eq. 121 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 16, 1918

capacity as a member of the corporation, whether it be as corporator, stockholder, director, president or other officer, and is the act of the corporation, whether acting in stockholders’ meeting or through its agents, the board … Miller, Minchin v. Second National Bank, Irwin v. Granite State Provident Association.

Stewart v. Stewart

31 N.J. Eq. 398 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1879

Also, Edmunds v. Eessey, 29 Bear. 288; Hartley v. Tribber, 16 Beav. 510; Swaine v. Kennerly, 1 Ves. & Bea. 469 ¡ Hart v. Durand, 8 Ansi. 684- In Ekringhaus v. … Brown v. Dye, 2 Boot 280; Porter y. Porter, 7 How. {Miss.) 106; Standley's Estate, L. B. {5 Eq.) 808 ; Hughes v. Decker, 38 Me. 153 ; Barwick Y. Miller, 4 Desauss. 434- And also under the statute of descents. Heath v.

Cane v. Cane

39 N.J. Eq. 148 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1884

—That a married woman goes to a brothel, is prima facie evidence -of adultery, Best v. Best, 1 Add. 411 ; Kenrick v. Kenrick, 4 Sagg. 137 ; Woods v. Woods, 4 Sagg, 138, note; but may be explained, Betts v. … Y.) 499; Bichardson v. Bichardson, 4 Port. 467 ; but his conduct, in going to a brothel, may be explained, Platt v. Platt, 5 Daly 395 ; Latham v.

Dobbins v. Cragin

50 N.J. Eq. 640 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1892

Pitney, V. C. The contest between the parties relates to the right to manufacture a certain soap and to use certain trade-marks in its sale; in which the complainant’s name occurs. … Cont. § *650 662; Barton v. Fitzgerald, 15 East 54; 2 Pars. Cont. (ed. 1866) 501; Browning v. Wright, 2 Bos. & P. 13.

Executors of Powers v. Administrator of Butler

4 N.J. Eq. 465 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1844

In Bateman v. … See also Duncan v. Lyon, 3 John. C. R. 356, 7; Foster v. Wood, 6 John. C. R. 90; Floyd v. Jayne, Ibid, 482; Norton v. Woods, 5 Paige, 249 ; Winthrop et al. v. Loubat, 3 Dess. 324, 5; Noland v.

Delmonico v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

12 N.J. Misc. 448 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 10, 1934

Backes, V. C. … Finnerty, an osteopath, could help her, she went to his institution, “The House of Finnerty,” in Montclair, September 11th, 1928, and stayed twenty-one days, when she left for the Pines, a boarding house in Montclair, where

Keller v. Linsenmyer

101 N.J. Eq. 664 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 10, 1927

Citing Taub v. Taub, 87 N.J. Eq. 630 ; Dolan v. Wagner, 95 N.J. Eq. 1 . … In Vreeland v.

Sarfaty v. Sarfaty

59 N.J. Eq. 193 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 24, 1900

In the case of Bowlby v. Bowlby, 10 C. E. … In Costill v. Costill, 2 Dick. Ch.