Case law

L'Hommedieu v. L'Hommedieu

98 N.J. Eq. 554 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 17, 1925

The executor testified to a conversation with his testator, which clearly showed that the latter was much concerned about the future of his son where dominion over money was involved. … upon the defendant Arthur an absolute right of property in the income of his father's estate, but the effect of the testimony would be to entirely change the testamentary disposition so that the legatee would have only a qualified

Baldwin v. Taylor

37 N.J. Eq. 78 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1883

I am aware that the general rule is established in England that where the context is silent, the words referring to the prior death of the legatee, in connection with some collateral event, apply to the happening of the contingency … R. (7 H. of L.) 388. *82 But I am clearly of opinion that the words under consideration were not used by the testator to express an intention to limit the gifts over, but only as a provision as to who should receive them

Woodruff v. Morristown Institution for Savings

34 N.J. Eq. 174 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1881

Where a recital is followed by general words, the general words will be held to be limited or qualified by the recital, in obedience to the maxim, verba generalia, restringuntur ad hábilitatem rei vel personam. … Dean, or those who have succeeded to his rights, could urge against them, the established rule being that the assignee of a mortgage takes it subject to all the equities which the mortgagor may claim against it, but free

Stephens v. of Howard

32 N.J. Eq. 244 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1880

The authority of the court must be considered established. It is, however, a power of great delicacy, and should, be exercised very sparingly and with the utmost caution. … There are persons with so little capacity to acquire musical knowledge, that *248 the whole fortune of these children might be spent upon one of them without qualifying her to teach even the rudiments successfully.

Jennings v. Studebaker Corp.

112 N.J. Eq. 591 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 11, 1933

The statute clearly gives to any creditor the right to maintain the suit. … I must assume that the federal courts carefully considered the circumstances and decided that the three men whom it named receivers were properly qualified for the office.

Goldstein v. Ewing

62 N.J. Eq. 69 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 28, 1901

Ewing to resort to this indebtedness in order to procure the stock necessary to qualify Mr. Collerd, since he had a large number of shares already standing in his name. In fact, it was a mere matter of convenience. … The effect of that evidence upon my mind I have already stated, but I am now clearly of the opinion that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the proceeding, and that the petition must be dismissed, with costs.

Melick v. Melick

17 N.J. Eq. 156 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1864

The petitioner admits that the residuary legatee is not a necessary party to the bill, but insists that under the'special circumstances of the case, the executor is not qualified to represent her interests. … She is clearly entitled to that privilege. It would he a reproach to the administration of justice, if the law were otherwise.

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

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

If, taken as a whole, the will indicates a general charitable intent or purpose, then effect should be given to that intent notwithstanding the particular paragraph establishing the trust does not clearly express it. … Such work may be done by the League's own staff * * * or other qualified workers who believe that the common good of the worthy and meritorious of all mankind is greater than that of an isolated part."

Vandermade v. Appert

125 N.J. Eq. 366 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 1, 1939

Rep. 133 , it was said: "The remedy of specific performance rests within the sound discretion of the court and should not be granted unless the right thereto is clearly and conclusively established by the party seeking it … The complainants' right in the instant case is not clearly and conclusively established.

Morris v. Leddy

111 N.J. Eq. 129 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 27, 1932

It is a well established rule of law that a party to a fraud cannot profit thereby. The Grace Realty Company was a party to the fraud. … The proofs herein show Leddy and his wife were the sole stockholders (except for one qualifying share held by their lawyer) of the Grace Realty Company.

Elkind Sons v. Retail Clerks'

114 N.J. Eq. 586 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 13, 1933

The defendants' "demand" for the closed shop was clearly in violation of the code. … Accordingly, such statutes do not render lawful any act or acts which were unlawful at the time the statutes were enacted, and the existence of a dispute is a condition of the immunity to injunction declared by the statute

Phair v. Melosh

125 N.J. Eq. 497 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 25, 1939

Melosh qualified as executor thereunder. … Melosh qualified as executor and by which her estate passed to her grandchildren, Elizabeth Melosh, now Phair (the complainant), and Rudolph C. Melosh, children of William F. Melosh.

Parmentier v. Pennsylvania Co. for Ins., C.

122 N.J. Eq. 25 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 7, 1937

With this intention on the part of the testatrix so clearly apparent, it seems to me that when she said that Mr. … He says, `the devisor seems to have had two intentions, which are inconsistent; one was to give an estate in fee to the feme covert , the other to qualify it in such manner as that her husband should have no power over it

Hardy v. Hangen

134 N.J. Eq. 176 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 26, 1943

Manifestly, the provision would materially qualify the obligation of the complainant to complete the sale and its attempted infiltration into the terms and conditions of sale was neither contemplated by the defendants nor … Cook hereinbefore reproduced are manifestly a preliminary recital of the existing state of the negotiations and indicate clearly that a comprehensive agreement in writing (presumably containing among others the so-called

Freeth v. Rule

117 N.J. Eq. 490 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 29, 1935

Allen, which clearly seeks to avert, rather than meet, the charges leveled against him. … The petitioner has established her right to the temporary relief which she seeks. There will be an order accordingly. *Page 496

Executors of Condict v. King

13 N.J. Eq. 375 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1861

But its effect upon the disposition of the personal estate was to change the absolute gift of the *377 property to the grandson into a gift of a qualified interest, which became absolute only upon his leaving issue at the … Such limitation over of an executory interest in personal estate is clearly valid. 2 Kent’s Com. 352.

Buckley v. Mayor, C., of Jersey City

105 N.J. Eq. 470 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 17, 1930

The evidence, however, clearly establishes, and I find therefrom, that the agreement between the parties to this litigation is in writing, and meets and satisfies the requirements of the statute of frauds, as hereinafter … The testimony clearly showed that the auction sale was well attended, and that there *Page 484 were, amongst those present, some of the most reputable and best qualified realtors, as well as most extensive property owners

Wilentz v. Hendrickson

133 N.J. Eq. 447 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 20, 1943

Hendrickson qualified as his successor. … And the mere difference in rates does not establish that the twelve per cent. rate is not interest * * *."

Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures

30 N.J. Eq. 145 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1878

The object of the legislature, in granting the charter, is *147 clearly expressed on the face of it; it was “ for the purpose of establishing a company for carrying on the business of manufactures in this state.” … And a right to hold and enjoy is an immunity expressly granted to them.

Ball v. Ward

73 N.J. Eq. 440 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 6, 1907

The answer also fails to set up clearly or expressly whether the conveyance was by way of payment or security. … Ward afterwards died, and Mrs, Ball qualified as executrix in her place, and on March 7th, 1907, a petition was filed for the revival of the suit against the devisees and trustees of Ward, on which ex parte order was made