Marsh v. Vanness

74 A. 47, 75 N.J. Eq. 607, 5 Buchanan 607, 1909 N.J. LEXIS 304
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 14, 1909·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur in the findings of fact of the learned vice-chancellor, and upon that ground affirm this decree without considering the question of pleading involved. Costs were properly allowed the complainant, this being a foreclosure suit. P. L. 1902 p. 528 § 53.

For affirmance—The Ci-iiee-Justice, .Garrison, Swayze, Reed, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Voorhees, Minturn, Bogert, Vredenburgi-i, Vroom, Gray, Died—14. For reversal—None.

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

Marsh v. Vanness, 74 A. 47, 75 N.J. Eq. 607, 5 Buchanan 607, 1909 N.J. LEXIS 304 (N.J. 1909).

74 A. 47 (Marsh v. Vanness) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mooney v. Petnick
145 A. 641 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1929)
Carson v. Cook County Liquor Co.
1913 OK 93 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)