Baily v. Massinger
This text of 57 A.2d 232 (Baily v. Massinger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
With the exception of the provision for counsel fees, the decree is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the foregoing opinion of the learned Vice-Chancellor.
We are of the view that, in the special circumstances, no counsel fee should be assessed against appellant in favor of the respondents J. Chester Massinger and Ruth B. Massinger, his wife, and that the counsel fee assessed against appellant in favor of the respondent John J. Clancy should be reduced to $500; and the decree is modified accordingly.
For affirmance — Wachenfeld, J. 1.
For modification — -The Chief-Justice, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Colie, Eastwood, Burling, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, Schettino, JJ. IS.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
57 A.2d 232, 141 N.J. Eq. 592, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baily-v-massinger-nj-1948.