Brand v. Quinn

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Brand v. Quinn

190 A. 323, 121 N.J. Eq. 260

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 5, 1937·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The appeal is from a decree dismissing a bill seeking to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent and for incidental relief. *263 We liave carefully examined the proofs and can only conclude that they support the findings of the learned vice-chancellor. The decree will be affirmed.

For affirmance — Trenchard, Case, Bodine, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, JJ. 8. For reversal — The Chiee-Justice, Parker, Raeeerty, JJ. 3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pee Curiam.

The appeal is from a decree dismissing a bill seeking to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent and for incidental relief. *263 We liave carefully examined the proofs and can only conclude that they support the findings of the learned vice-chancellor. The decree will be affirmed.

For affirmance — Trenchard, Case, Bodine, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, JJ. 8. For reversal — The Chiee-Justice, Parker, Raeeerty, JJ. 3.

Brand v. Quinn, 190 A. 323, 121 N.J. Eq. 260 (N.J. 1937).

Pincite

190 A. 323 (Brand v. Quinn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related