Brands v. Cassedy

5 A.2d 685, 125 N.J. Eq. 346, 1939 N.J. LEXIS 657
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided April 21, 1939·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

We have carefully examined the pleading and proofs in this case, the arguments of counsel and the conclusions of the learned vice-chancellor, and we are of the opinion that his conclusions as to the facts and his application of the law thereto were in all respects proper.

The decree is affirmed.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chibe-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Porter, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Hague, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

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

Brands v. Cassedy, 5 A.2d 685, 125 N.J. Eq. 346, 1939 N.J. LEXIS 657 (N.J. 1939).

5 A.2d 685 (Brands v. Cassedy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goodpasture v. Goodpasture
278 A.2d 531 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1971)
Drumm v. Pavlick
57 A.2d 662 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1948)
Wujciak v. Wujciak
55 A.2d 164 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1947)