Bank of Montclair v. Mallas

190 A. 51, 121 N.J. Eq. 266, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 532

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur in the view expressed in the court below, that the omission of the cestuis que trust from the foreclosure constituted a cloud on the title of the realty contracted to be sold, and that such cloud was not removed by the orphans court proceeding.

The rule that equity will not compel a purchaser to take a doubtful title, laid down in the chancery cases cited in the court below, has also the sanction of this court. Tillotson v. Gesner, 33 N. J. Eq. 313; Van Riper v. Wickersham, 77 N. J. Eq. 232; Doutney v. Lambie, 78 N. J. Eq. 277; Security Bond and Mortgage Co. v. Weiss, 101 N. J. Eq. 307; affirming 100 N. J. Eq. 156; Rosenson v. Bochenek, 102 N. J. Eq. 543.

The decree under review will be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Ciiiee-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Hei-ier, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Rafeerty, Cole, JJ. 14. For reversal — None.