Grothenhen v. Duffield

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Grothenhen v. Duffield

137 A. 712, 5 N.J. Misc. 677, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 164

DecidedJune 7, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A. 712 (Grothenhen v. Duffield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Grothenhen v. Duffield, 137 A. 712, 5 N.J. Misc. 677, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 164 (N.J. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Memokandum.

The judgment in this case was entered upon a bond and warrant of attorney. The bond was secured by a mortgage which had been foreclosed and the mortgaged lands sold under such proceedings before the action was taken leading up to the judgment now under attack.

[678]*678Under such circumstances the proceedings are controlled by, 3 Comp. Stat., p. 3423, § 51, and it is apparent that such statute was not followed or complied with.

The rule to show cause must therefore be made absolute and the judgment set aside, with costs.

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

Memokandum.

The judgment in this case was entered upon a bond and warrant of attorney. The bond was secured by a mortgage which had been foreclosed and the mortgaged lands sold under such proceedings before the action was taken leading up to the judgment now under attack.

[678]*678Under such circumstances the proceedings are controlled by, 3 Comp. Stat., p. 3423, § 51, and it is apparent that such statute was not followed or complied with.

The rule to show cause must therefore be made absolute and the judgment set aside, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A. 712, 5 N.J. Misc. 677, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grothenhen-v-duffield-nj-1927.