Case law

Chamberlain v. Chamberlain

68 N.J. Eq. 414 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 23, 1905

Stevenson, V. C. (orally). This bill is filed under the twentieth section of our Divorce act by Mary Chamberlain against Stroud H. … The doctrine of this case was rejected by our court of errors and appeals in the case of Collins v. Voorhees, to which I shall next refer, and which belongs to the second class. The case of Collins v.

Wilber v. Asbury Park National Bank, C., Co.

142 N.J. Eq. 99 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 26, 1948

Per Bentley, V.C., Raque v. City of Speyer, 97 N.J. Eq. 447 . See, also, Brown v. Condit, 70 N.J. Eq. 440 . … Rowe v. Davis, 138 N.J. Eq. 122 . In MacKenzie v. Trustees, c., supra , Mr.

Raleigh v. Fitzpatrick

43 N.J. Eq. 501 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1887

Gardner v. Raisbeck, 1 Stew. Eq. 71; Longstreet v. Phile, 10 Vr. 63 ; Dawley v. Brown, 79 N. Y. 390, 397 . … I have sought to satisfy my mind that I could, according to my first desire, follow City Pottery Co. v. Yates, *522 10 Stew.

Kanzler v. Smith

142 N.J. Eq. 609 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 14, 1948

At a meeting of the board of directors called for that purpose, the resolution was defeated as a result of a tie vote. … McCartin v. Traphagen, 43 N.J. Eq. 323 ; 11 Atl. Rep. 156 ; affirmed, 45 N.J. Eq. 265 ; 17 Atl. Rep. 809 .

Coler v. Tacoma Railway & Power Co.

64 N.J. Eq. 117 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 24, 1902

Turner v. Bailey, 12 Wash. 634 (1895). In Manhattan Trust Co. v. … In Cowell v. Springs Co., 100 U.

In Re Caruba

139 N.J. Eq. 404 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 29, 1947

Eq. 377 ; Edwards v. Edwards, 87 N.J. Eq. 546 ; Sachs v. High Clothing Co., 90 N.J. Eq. 545 ; Backer v. A.B. B. Realty Co., 107 N.J. Eq. 246 ; Zettler v. … State Board of Milk Control v. Newark Milk Co., 118 N.J. Eq. 504 . The power is as ancient as the courts to which it is attached and "as ancient as any other part of the common law." Rex v. Almon, Hil., 5 Geo.

Osborne v. O'Reilly

42 N.J. Eq. 467 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1887

Palys v. Jewett, 5 Stew. Eq. 302. And the fact that it is introduced in connection with a claim for an account, makes no difference. 1 Pom. Eq. Jur. § 178. … In Monongahela Navigation Co. v.

Stockton v. Central Railroad

50 N.J. Eq. 52 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1892

State v. Town of Union, 4 Vr. 350 ; Gifford v. New Jersey R. R. Co., 2 Stock. 172 ; State v. Newark, 5 Vr. 236 ; Rader v. Township of Union, 10 Vr. 509 ; S. C., 12 Vr. 621 ; Payne v. Mahon, 12 Vr. 292 ; State v. … Div. 752 ; Attorney-General v. Cockermough Local Board, 18 Eq. Cas. 172; Attorney-General v. Great Eastern Ry. Co., 11 Ch. Div. 449; Attorney-General v. Great Northern Ry. Co., 1 Drew. & S. 184,6 Jur. (N.

In Re Ries

101 N.J. Eq. 315 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 13, 1927

In Mulford v. Tunis, 35 N.J. … See King v. Oliphant, L.R. ( 1905 ), 2 K.B. 67. See, also, Rex v. Brisac, 4 East 164, 171.

Givernaud v. Givernaud

81 N.J. Eq. 66 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 6, 1912

Eq. (16 Stew.) 701; Kearns v. Kearns, 70 N. J. Eq. (4 Robb.) 483; Flower v. Lloyd. 10 Ch. Div. 327; Abouloff v. Opperheimer Company, 10 Q. B. D. 295; Cole v. Langford (1898), 2 Q. B. 36. … I have very hastily gathered some recent authorities on this subject, which are as follows: Yeomans v. Petty, 40 N. J. Eq. (13 Stew.) 495; Gray v. Gray, 39 N. J. Eq. (12 Stew.) 512; Bennett v. Finnegan, 72 N. J.

Collins v. Toppin

65 N.J. Eq. 439 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 10, 1903

I refer to Garnsey v. Mundy, 9 C. E. Gr. 243; Mulock v. Mulock, 4 Stew. Eq. 594; Martling v. Martling, 2 Dick. Ch. Rep. 122 (at p. 132); Hall v. Otterson, 7 Dick. Ch. Rep. 522; Lovett v. Taylor, 9 Dick. Ch. … In Mulock v.

Stevens v. Headley

69 N.J. Eq. 533 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 24, 1905

In Dill v. Board of Education, 47 N. J. … In Tobey v.

Thiel v. Perkins

92 N.J. Eq. 79 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 25, 1916

Stevenson, V. C. … The boards were on the roof, and, as Mr.

American Central Insurance v. Landau

62 N.J. Eq. 73 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 1, 1901

Winchester also said, “You keep a bank account and come in contact with the president and board of directors?” . … Then, after referring to Harcourt v. Ramsbottom, he says: “I observe that, in Morse v.

Mayor of Paterson v. East Jersey Water Co.

74 N.J. Eq. 49 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 14, 1908

In Campbell v. Smith, 8 N. J. … In New York City v.

Geer v. Amalgamated Copper Co.

61 N.J. Eq. 364 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 16, 1901

It admits that Rogers, Rockefeller and Burrage, three -of the seven directors of. the defendant company, are also -directors in the Butte and Boston company, and that some of the present board of directors of the .defendant … It was urged by the defendant that the recent case of Donald v. American Smelting and Refining Co., 48 Atl.

Williams v. Odessa & Middletown Railway Co.

7 Del. Ch. 303 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 15, 1895

And the said Nathaniel Williams, who had been made secretary of the said board, informed said William E. … Co. v.

Sparks Manufacturing Co. v. Town of Newton

57 N.J. Eq. 367 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 21, 1898

(ed. of 1868) 182 et seq., citing Arkwright v. Gell, 5 Mees. & W. 203; Magor v. Chadwick, 11 Ad. & E. 571; Wood v. Waud, 3 Welsb., H. & G. Exch. 748; Ivimey v. Stocker, L. R. 1 Ch. App. 396; Mason v. … See Waller v.