Executors of Woodruff v. Brugh

6 N.J. Eq. 465
CourtNew Jersey Court of Chancery
DecidedSeptember 15, 1847
StatusPublished

This text of 6 N.J. Eq. 465 (Executors of Woodruff v. Brugh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Executors of Woodruff v. Brugh, 6 N.J. Eq. 465 (N.J. Ct. App. 1847).

Opinion

The Chancellor.

A decree pro confesso was taken against all the defendants to the original bill, except Housel, twenty three years before the filing of the supplemental bill; and Housel answered the original bill twenty two years before the filing of the supplemental bill; and no step has been taken in the cause in the mean time. The supplemental bill is against some of the défendants in the original suit and against other persons who haye became alienees from others of said defendants since the said decree pro confesso was taken. There is nothing in what has occurred since the filing of the original bill making a supplemental bill necessary. The only object’of it therefore, must [477]*477be to avoid the effect which the lapse of time might have upon the original suit or upon a new original bill. The complainant cannot be permitted thus to relieve himself from the effect of his own laches.

Demurrer allowed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 N.J. Eq. 465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/executors-of-woodruff-v-brugh-njch-1847.