Manz v. Tenafly Trust Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Manz v. Tenafly Trust Co.

187 A. 137, 121 N.J. Eq. 112

DecidedOctober 5, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 187 A. 137 (Manz v. Tenafly Trust Co.) 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

Manz v. Tenafly Trust Co., 187 A. 137, 121 N.J. Eq. 112 (N.J. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appeal is from a decree in the court of chancery holding that John Manz in his lifetime had made to the complainant a valid gift of the moneys on deposit to his credit in the defendant trust company. The proofs examined clearly support the findings of the court.

The decree is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heiier, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Woles-Kbil, Raeeerty, JJ. 11. For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

The appeal is from a decree in the court of chancery holding that John Manz in his lifetime had made to the complainant a valid gift of the moneys on deposit to his credit in the defendant trust company. The proofs examined clearly support the findings of the court.

The decree is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heiier, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Woles-Kbil, Raeeerty, JJ. 11. For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 A. 137, 121 N.J. Eq. 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manz-v-tenafly-trust-co-nj-1936.