Brokaw's v. Conover

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Brokaw's v. Conover

27 N.J. Eq. 462

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedMay 15, 1876

StatusPublished

This text of 27 N.J. Eq. 462 (Brokaw's v. Conover) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brokaw's v. Conover, 27 N.J. Eq. 462 (N.J. Ct. App. 1876).

Pincite

Opinion

The Ordinary.

This appeal brings up for review so< much of the decree of the Orphans Court of Hunterdon county, admitting to pro[463]*463bate the will of Dorothy Brokaw, deceased, as awards costs and counsel fees to the caveator, and so much of an order taxing costs in the suit, as makes an extra allowance of $225 to the court beyond legal fees. An examination of the evidence has satisfied me that the case is not one in which costs or counsel fees should have been allowed to the caveator.. The part of the decree appealed from will, therefore, be-reversed; but, under the evidence, and in view of the adjudication of the Orphans Court, I am not willing to go-further and decree payment of the costs and counsel fees of the proponent by the caveator. The item of judges’ fees, above referred to, will be struck out. ISTo costs of the appeal will be awarded.

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

The Ordinary.

This appeal brings up for review so< much of the decree of the Orphans Court of Hunterdon county, admitting to pro[463]*463bate the will of Dorothy Brokaw, deceased, as awards costs and counsel fees to the caveator, and so much of an order taxing costs in the suit, as makes an extra allowance of $225 to the court beyond legal fees. An examination of the evidence has satisfied me that the case is not one in which costs or counsel fees should have been allowed to the caveator.. The part of the decree appealed from will, therefore, be-reversed; but, under the evidence, and in view of the adjudication of the Orphans Court, I am not willing to go-further and decree payment of the costs and counsel fees of the proponent by the caveator. The item of judges’ fees, above referred to, will be struck out. ISTo costs of the appeal will be awarded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 N.J. Eq. 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brokaws-v-conover-njsuperctappdiv-1876.