Case law

Moran v. Kelley

95 N.J. Eq. 380 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 26, 1924

Such a use, when possessing those elements of definifeness, is sustained, generally, by the American authorities (6 Cyc. 920), and a similar bequest was sustained by Vice-Chancellor Emery in this court in Kerrigan v. … Rep. 701 , which is cited with approval by Vice-Chancellor Stevenson in Brown v. Condit, 70 N. J. Eq. 440, and by Vice-Chancellor Stevens in While v. Newark, 103 Atl. Rep. 1043 . See, also, Kerrigan v. Connelly, 46 Atl.

Dinkins v. Kip

110 N.J. Eq. 486 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 14, 1932

Berry, V. C. The complainants in the above stated causes are property owners in the town of Montclair. … On the authority of Srager v. Mintz, supra, therefore, the bills will be dismissed.

Fredd v. Darnell

107 N.J. Eq. 249 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 14, 1930

Canfield v. Browning, 69 N.J. Law 553 . No other levy was made of that execution prior to its return day, and no valid levy of it could be made thereafter. Matthews v. Warne, 11 N.J. Law 295 , 350 ; Kemble v. … Law 526 , 530 ; Canfield v. Browning, supra (at p. 555 ); Olden v. Sassman, 72 N.J. Eq. 637 .

Camovito v. Matthews

82 N.J. Eq. 218 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 24, 1913

Backes, V. C. This is a bill to enforce a restrictive covenant. In 1892 Murray D. … Fortesque v. Carroll, 76 N. J. Eq. (6 Buch.) 583; Howland v. Andrus, 81 N. J. Eq. (11 Buch.) 175. The bill will be dismissed, with costs.

Bull v. International Power Co.

87 N.J. Eq. 1 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 26, 1916

See Lehigh Coal and Navigation Co. v. Central Railroad Co., 5 N. J. *5 L. J. 214. … Earle v. American Sugar Refining Co., 74 N. J. Eq. 751 (at p. 762).

Mayer v. McLaughlin

80 N.J. Eq. 342 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 9, 1912

X think, as far as this court is concerned, the case must he ruled by the principle of the decision in Brown v. Harris, 67 N. J. Law (38 Vr.) 207. … The rationale of the decision in Brown v. Harris appears to be this: implied repealers are not favored. Hotel Registry Corporation v. Stafford, 70 N. J. Law (41 Vr.) 536.

Blonder v. United Retail Employes, C., No. 108

128 N.J. Eq. 41 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Aug 28, 1940

The defendants are five former employes of the complainant, the union to which they belong, and Brown, the general manager of the union. … Miller's, Inc. , v. Journeymen Tailors, c., supra.

Hill v. Shultz

40 N.J. Eq. 164 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1885

Prop. 637; Taylor on Land, and Tenant § 161; Ogden v. Jennings, 62 N. Y. 526 ; Doyle v. Lord, 64 N. Y. 432 ; Voorhees v. Burchard, 55 N. Y. 98 ; French v. Carhart, 1 N. Y. 96 . … On the side over the steps it was covered with boards, and on the other side with iron bars, between which were boards.

Van Houten v. Pine

38 N.J. Eq. 72 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1884

Van Houten v. Pine, 9 Stew. Eq. 133. … Van Houten v. Pine, 9 Stew. Eq. 133. It appears by the proof that the association has an invested fund of $25,000.

Roseville Trust Co. v. Mott

85 N.J. Eq. 297 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 20, 1915

Just as well might the defendants object that at the time the suit was instituted there were two boards, each claiming to be the rightful manager; one a de facto board in actual control, and another a de jure board, entitled … This court could not, even in a direct proceeding, determine which was the legal, board (Kean v. Union Water Co., 52 N. J.

Auerbacher v. Wood

139 N.J. Eq. 599 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 30, 1947

Chicago Bar Association v. United Taxpayers Association (Ill.), 38 N.E. Rep. 2d 349; Lowell Bar Association v. Loeb (Mass.), 52 N.E. Rep. 2d 27; Fitchette v. Taylor (Minn.), 254 N.W. … Rep. 910 ; 94 A.L.R. 356 ; Dworken v. Apartment House Owners Association ( Ohio ), 176 N.E. Rep. 577 ; Childs v. Smeltzer (Pa.), 171 Atl. Rep. 883 ; Paul v. Stanley (Wash.), 12 Pac. Rep. 2d 401; Merrick v.

Miller v. Gourley

65 N.J. Eq. 237 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 6, 1903

Wilkinson v. Bauerle, 14 Stew. Eq. 635, 641 (Court of Appeals), and the list of causes cited in Savage v. Miller, 11 Dick. Ch. Rep. 438, in the opinion of Mr. Justice Garrison, also in the court of appeals. … A review of the cases may be found in the opinion of Yice-Chancellor Eeed, in the case of Skirm v. Eastern Rubber Manufacturing Co., 12 Dick. Ch. Rep. 184. The court of appeals, in National Bank v. Sprague, 6 C. E.

Schreiber v. Drosness

100 N.J. Eq. 123 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 29, 1926

Laird v. Atlantic Coast Co., 73 N.J. Eq. 5 ; Ashby v. Yetter, 78 N.J. Eq. 173 ; Robinson v. Robinson, 86 N.J. Eq. 165 ; Bijur Motor Co. v. International Association, c., 92 N.J. Eq. 183 . … Counsel for the complainants further urges, on the authority of Roseberg v. American Hotel Co., 95 N.J.

Cozy Lake v. Nyoda Girls Camp

97 N.J. Eq. 180 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 4, 1925

When defendant's dam was erected there was a spillway constructed in it, and in this spillway were batter boards. About a year and a half prior to May 1st, 1924, these batter boards were replaced by a stationary gate. … The law in regard to cases of this character is elaborately discussed in the case of Mayor, c., of Paterson v. East Jersey Water Co., 74 N.J. Eq. 49 .

Lonsdale, C., Corp. v. International, C., Co.

101 N.J. Eq. 554 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 20, 1927

There is no question of the standing of these complainants, as was the case in Windhurst v. Central Leather Co., 101 N.J. Eq. 543 . … What has already been said renders it unnecessary to deal with questions decided in all the cases of the class commencing with Kean v. Johnson, 9 N.J. Eq. 401 , and ending with Allen v. Francisco Sugar Co., 92 N.J.

Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad v. Oxford Iron Co.

33 N.J. Eq. 192 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1880

St. 107; McCormick v. Los Angeles Co., Jfi Cal. 185); a pilot, who was also a contractor (Hanson v. Hiles, 84 Iowa 350 ; see Cook v. Parham, $4 Ala. $1; Dudman v. Dublin Board, Ir. L. B. (7 Com. … Bucket, 17 Hun 463 ; Bogers v. Omaha Co., 4 Neb. 54 ; Goff v. Papin, 34 Mo. 177 ; Brown’s Case, 4 Ben. 143 ; Nash y. Mosher, 19 Wend. 431 ; Sinton v. Boberts, 46 Ind. 416 ; Fanuell v. Grier, 38 Iowa 83 ; Bonnell y.

Kerlin v. West

4 N.J. Eq. 449 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1844

Hart v. Mayor of Albany, 3 Paige, 214 : Smallman v. Onions, 3 Brown, C. R. 623.

Wallace v. Wallace

62 N.J. Eq. 509 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 15, 1901

Chancellor Zabriskie does, indeed, say of Brown v. Brown, in Coddington v. Coddington, 5 C. E. … It was held by Chancellor Green, in Brown v.

Johnson v. Tennessee Oil, Co.

74 N.J. Eq. 32 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 31, 1908

Emery, V. C. … Barnes v. Perine, 12 N. Y. 18, 29 (1854).

Tatem v. Powell

50 N.J. Eq. 316 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1892

This doctrine, as applied to judicial sales of land, is illustrated in this state by the cases of Combs v. Little, 3 Gr. Ch. 310; Marlatt v. Wanwick & Smith, 3 C. E. Gr. 109; 4 C. E. Gr. 441; Merritt v. Brown, 4 C. E. … Gr. 401; Walker v. Hill, 6 C. E. Gr. 191; 7 C. E. Gr. 513; Dodd v. Wakeman, 11 C. E. Gr. 484; 12 C. E. Gr. 564. In Merritt v. Brown, 6 C. E.