Case law

West Long Branch v. Home Bldg., C., Co.

99 N.J. Eq. 738 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1926

Dodd v. Board, 67 N.J. Law 463 . It based its decision on a finding of fact. No appeal from that decision was taken. This finding of fact is, at least, evidential here. … Morris Railroad Co. v. Prudden, 20 N.J. Eq. 531 ; Halsey v. Rapid Transit Co., 47 N.J. Eq. 380 ; Humphreys v. Eastlack, 63 N.J. Eq. 136 .

A. Hollander v. Philip A. Singer

119 N.J. Eq. 52 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 5, 1935

Justice Pitney, speaking for the United States supreme court in the case of Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers Co., 240 U.S. 251 ; 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 269 . … The court further said: "(5) Under the facts found and proved, the rule of Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers Co., 240 U.S. 251 ; 36 S.Ct. 269 ; 60 L.Ed. 629 , is applicable.

Daly v. Ely

53 N.J. Eq. 270 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1895

Pitney, V. C. The dispute common to both cases is as to the amount of fees for publishing advertisements of sale to be allowed to the newspaper publishing the same. … It does not say that such public officer or board shall pay so much and no more, or that such newspaper shall be entitled to charge so much and no more, but simply that it shall be lawful to pay so much and no more.

Shanik v. Botany Worsted Mills

133 N.J. Eq. 219 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 31, 1943

It is also alleged that "The Board of Directors consists largely of officers and managers of the Corporation. Some or many of them may be holders of Class B stock," c. … Fuller v. Hollander Co., 61 N.J. Eq. 648 . The bill herein does not come within any of the above stated situations. Complainant cites the cases of Archer v. American Water Works Co., 50 N.J. Eq. 33 ; Scott v. P.

Sanders v. Reid

131 N.J. Eq. 407 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 15, 1942

In Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Norris, 31 N.J. … They are more fully set forth in 3 Pom. ( 5th ed. ) § 805 (at p. 191 ), and in Central Railroad Co. v. MacCartney, 68 N.J. Law 165 , 175 ; 52 Atl. Rep. 575 ; Musconetcong Iron Works v.

Shafto v. Shafto

28 N.J. Eq. 34 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1877

His bill was not filed until after he had been sued for her ■ board by the person in whose family she lived after she left him. … Shelford on Marr. and Div. 211; 2 Bishop on Marr. and Div. § 584. “ If,” says Sir William Scott, in Briggs v.

Kuser v. Cooke

112 N.J. Eq. 553 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 29, 1933

Salt Lake City National Bank v. Hendrickson, 40 N.J. Law 52 ; Boehme v. Rall, 51 N.J. Eq. 541 ; Franklin Trust v. Rutherford, c., Electric Co., 57 N.J. Eq. 42 ; Perkins v. Trinity Realty Co., 69 N.J. Eq. 723 . … Schuler v. Southern Iron and Steel Co., 77 N.J. Eq. 60 ; Hageman v. Brown, 76 N.J. Eq. 126 ; Muller v. Muller, 76 N.J. Eq. 158 ; Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Sturges, 33 N.J. Eq. 328 .

Henry v. Henry

79 N.J. Eq. 493 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 11, 1912

The sixth section of the Divorce act of 1907 provides as follows: “For purposes of divorce, either absolute or from bed and board, jurisdiction may be acquired by personal service of process upon the defendant within this … Griffiths v. Griffiths, 69 N. J. Eq. (3 Robb.) 689.

Rau v. Doremus

100 N.J. Eq. 434 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jan 5, 1927

In the case of Cox v. Brown, 87 N.J. … In the case of Swinley v. Force, 78 N.J.

Outwater v. Public Service Corp. of N.J.

103 N.J. Eq. 461 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 19, 1928

Directors of the Public Service Corporation compose the board of directors of the Electric and Gas Company; members of the latter board form the directorate of four of the merging companies. … Corp. § 8220; Municipal Gas Company of Albany v. Rice, 138 N.Y. 151 .

Fulton v. Golden

28 N.J. Eq. 37 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1877

These facts are sufficient to induce the court, in the exercise of its discretion (Brown v. Bulkley, 1 McCart. 294), to suppress the depositions.

Slack v. Bird

23 N.J. Eq. 238 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1872

Hill, 3 Burr. 1881 ; Wilson v. Bayly, 3 Bro. P. C. (Toml. ed.) 195 ; Stones v. Heurtly, 1 Ves., sen., 165; Perry v. Woods, 3 Ves. 204; Brown v. Bigg, 7 Ves. 280; Garland v. Thomas, 1 B. & P., N. S., 82; Edwards v. … Sir William Grant, in Brown v. Bigg, and Justice Bailey, in delivering the judgment in Doe v. Prigg, express great doubt of the correctness of their decisions.

South Camden Trust Co. v. Stiefel

101 N.J. Eq. 41 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 14, 1927

Law 160 ; Allen v. Wheeler, 21 N.J. Law 93 ; Coykendall v. Robinson, 39 N.J. Law 98 ; Brown v. Warden, 44 N.J. Law 177 ; Mershon v. Castree, 57 N.J. Law 484 . … Stanbery v. Baker, supra.

Bachman v. First-Mechanics, B. Trenton

142 N.J. Eq. 389 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 5, 1948

McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. (U.S.) 316; 4 L.Ed. 579 ; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. (U.S.) 738; 6 L.Ed. 204 . … Delano v. Butler, 118 U.S. 634 ; 7 S.Ct. 39 ; 30 L.Ed. 260 ; Winters v. Armstrong, 37 Fed. Rep. 508. In the present case the Comptroller has not issued his certificate of approval.

McCran v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

94 N.J. Eq. 281 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 23, 1923

See Doremus v. Cameron, 49 N. J. Eq. 1; Neptune Fisheries Co. v. Cape May R. E. Co., 89 N. J. … In Board of Railroad Commissioners v. Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Co., 79 N. J.

Kessler v. Troast

101 N.J. Eq. 536 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jul 29, 1927

of the contract with regard thereto was as follows: "It is hereby understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the said party of the second part will make application forthwith, in writing, to the zoning board … To the same effect are Long v. Hartwell, 34 N.J. Law 116 ; Merchants and Traders Development Co. v. Mercer Realty Co., 99 N.J. Law 442 ; Ireland v. Penn Motors Corp., 100 N.J. Eq. 166 .

Weigel v. Weigel

63 N.J. Eq. 677 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Sep 20, 1902

Counsel for the defendant cites, in support of this proposition, the cases of Marsh v. Marsh, 1 McCart. 315; Graeff v. Graeff, 25 Atl. Rep. 704 ; Chipchase v. Chipchase, 3 Dick. Ch. Rep. 549; affirmed on appeal, 4 Dick. … Rep. 594; Drayton v. Drayton, 9 Dick. Ch. Rep. 298.

Feigenspan v. Mulligan

63 N.J. Eq. 179 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 11, 1902

Voight v. Excise Board of Newark, 30 Vr. 358, 360 (Justice Gummere); Semple v. Flynn, 10 Atl. Rep. 177 ; 17 Am. & Eng. Encycl. L. 232. But it is claimed that the act of March 28th, 1892 (Gen. … Precisely this point seems to have been settled adversely to the complainant’s contention in Voight v. Excise Board of Newark, supra.

Drummond v. Westervelt

24 N.J. Eq. 30 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1873

February, 1873, entered into partnership as builders; that on the 23st day of March, 1871, the firm entered into a contract with Thomas Beatty to do all the carpenter work, they furnishing all the materials therefor, for three brown … Brooke v. Hewitt, 3 Ves. 255 ; Vail’s Executors v. Central R. R. Co., 8 C. E. Green 466.

Tichenor v. Dodd

4 N.J. Eq. 454 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1844

In Tweddell v. … In Stevenson and Woodruff v. Black, Saxton, 342, the principle of the case of Waring v. Ward and Tweddell v.