Dunham v. Cades
170 A. 656, 115 N.J. Eq. 290
Opinion
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion delivered by Vice-Chancellor Davis, in the court of chancery.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, DILL, JJ. 12.
For reversal — PARKER, J. 1. *Page 295
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dunham v. Cades, 170 A. 656, 115 N.J. Eq. 290 (N.J. 1934).
170 A. 656 (Dunham v. Cades) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Telefest, Inc. v. Vu-TV, Inc.
591 F. Supp. 1368 (D. New Jersey, 1984)
Neubauer v. Cloutier
122 N.W.2d 623 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1963)
Glasser v. Feller
56 A.2d 137 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1947)
Blum v. Sexton
172 A. 333 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1934)