Martin v. Kimball
99 A. 1070, 86 N.J. Eq. 432, 1 Stock. 432, 1916 N.J. LEXIS 472
Opinion
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in -the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Stevens.
For affirmance — The Chibe-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trbnchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Black, White, Hee-EENHEIMBR, TAYLOR, GARDNER-12.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Martin v. Kimball, 99 A. 1070, 86 N.J. Eq. 432, 1 Stock. 432, 1916 N.J. LEXIS 472 (N.J. 1916).
99 A. 1070 (Martin v. Kimball) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Emmert v. Old National Bank of Martinsburg
246 S.E.2d 236 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1978)
Green v. Green
36 A.2d 217 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1944)
Lembeck v. Lembeck
145 A. 327 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1929)
Richardson v. McCloskey
276 S.W. 680 (Texas Supreme Court, 1925)
Berger v. Burnett
127 A. 160 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1924)