Knoup v. Carver

70 A. 660, 74 N.J. Eq. 449, 1908 N.J. LEXIS 274
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 15, 1908·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

An examination of the testimony satisfies us that the transaction between the parties to this cause was executed at Manasquan in this state. While it is true that the preliminary negotiations for the loan were conducted in Philadelphia, the land involved is situated in this state, the contract is to be performed here, the money was paid here, the papers executed and the entire transaction consummated at Manasquan, and hence this jurisdiction furnishes lex loci contractus. This being so, we conclude that the question of usury involved in the transaction was correctly resolved by the learned vice-chancellor, and that the decree of the court of chancery should be affirmed.

[450] For affirmance — The Chancellor, Ci-iiee-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Reed, Trenci-iard, Parker, Voori-iees, Min-turn, Bogert, Vredenburgi-i, Vroom, Green, Gray, Dill —15. For reversal — None.

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

Knoup v. Carver, 70 A. 660, 74 N.J. Eq. 449, 1908 N.J. LEXIS 274 (N.J. 1908).

70 A. 660 (Knoup v. Carver) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grady v. Price
383 P.2d 173 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1963)
Searl v. Earll
62 A.2d 374 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1948)
Swetland v. Swetland
149 A. 50 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1930)