In re Ganey

119 A. 925, 94 N.J. Eq. 502, 9 Stock. 502, 1923 N.J. LEXIS 669
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedFebruary 1, 1923
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 119 A. 925 (In re Ganey) 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
In re Ganey, 119 A. 925, 94 N.J. Eq. 502, 9 Stock. 502, 1923 N.J. LEXIS 669 (N.J. 1923).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Fielder.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chief-Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Ivalisci-i, Black, Katzenbach, White, Heppeni-ieimer, Williams, Gardner, Ackerson, Van Buskirk—15.

For reversal—Hone.

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

Related

Mowery v. Mowery
118 A.2d 49 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1955)
Greenspan v. Slate
92 A.2d 47 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1952)
Hillsdale Nat. Bank v. Sansone
78 A.2d 441 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1951)
STATE BY PARSONS v. Standard Oil Co.
74 A.2d 565 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1950)
Marsh v. Scott
63 A.2d 275 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1949)
Meier v. Planer
152 A. 246 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
119 A. 925, 94 N.J. Eq. 502, 9 Stock. 502, 1923 N.J. LEXIS 669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ganey-nj-1923.