Kelleher v. Bragg

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Kelleher v. Bragg

128 A. 921, 97 N.J. Eq. 547, 12 Stock. 547, 1925 N.J. LEXIS 567

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided March 16, 1925·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Coriam.

The bill of complaint was filed in this case to compel the specific performance of a contract to sell real estate. The property is known as Nos. 2709, 2711, 2718 and 2718A Boulevard, Jersey City. Vice-Chancellor Lewis, before whom the case was heard, refused to advise a decree for specific performance, but did advise a decree dismissing the bill of complaint.

Our consideration of the case leads us to the same conclusion as that advised by the learned vice-chancellor.

The decree of the court of chancery is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance—The Chiee-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Minturn, Black, Katzenbach, Lloyd, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, Clark, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 13.

For reversal—None.

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

Per Coriam.

The bill of complaint was filed in this case to compel the specific performance of a contract to sell real estate. The property is known as Nos. 2709, 2711, 2718 and 2718A Boulevard, Jersey City. Vice-Chancellor Lewis, before whom the case was heard, refused to advise a decree for specific performance, but did advise a decree dismissing the bill of complaint.

Our consideration of the case leads us to the same conclusion as that advised by the learned vice-chancellor.

The decree of the court of chancery is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance—The Chiee-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Minturn, Black, Katzenbach, Lloyd, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, Clark, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 13.

For reversal—None.

Kelleher v. Bragg, 128 A. 921, 97 N.J. Eq. 547, 12 Stock. 547, 1925 N.J. LEXIS 567 (N.J. 1925).

Pincite

128 A. 921 (Kelleher v. Bragg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related