Gaskill v. Clarke

56 A.2d 873, 141 N.J. Eq. 270, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 617

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 29, 1948·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This was a suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land.

A careful examination of the record and briefs satisfies us that the decree entered in the Court of Chancery should be affirmed.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Bodine, Donges, Hehee, Colie, Wacheneeld, Eastwood, Bueling, Wells, Dill, Feeund, McLean, Schettino, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

This was a suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land.

A careful examination of the record and briefs satisfies us that the decree entered in the Court of Chancery should be affirmed.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Bodine, Donges, Hehee, Colie, Wacheneeld, Eastwood, Bueling, Wells, Dill, Feeund, McLean, Schettino, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Gaskill v. Clarke, 56 A.2d 873, 141 N.J. Eq. 270, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 617 (N.J. 1948).

Pincite

56 A.2d 873 (Gaskill v. Clarke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.