McMurtry v. Schneider

Supreme Court of New Jersey

McMurtry v. Schneider

182 A. 618, 116 N.J.L. 86, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 184

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 9, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The sole and entire question in this case is whether a suit for deficiency under section 48 (3 Comp. Stat., p. 3421), upon a bond, secured by a mortgage, must be instituted within six months from the date of the public sale or from the date of confirmation of the sale.

This question has been recently, definitely, settled by this court in Wooton v. Pollock, 119 N. J. Eq. 128, requiring a reversal of the judgment under review, with costs.

For affirmance — None.

For reversal — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, JJ. 14.

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

Per Curiam.

The sole and entire question in this case is whether a suit for deficiency under section 48 (3 Comp. Stat., p. 3421), upon a bond, secured by a mortgage, must be instituted within six months from the date of the public sale or from the date of confirmation of the sale.

This question has been recently, definitely, settled by this court in Wooton v. Pollock, 119 N. J. Eq. 128, requiring a reversal of the judgment under review, with costs.

For affirmance — None.

For reversal — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, JJ. 14.

McMurtry v. Schneider, 182 A. 618, 116 N.J.L. 86, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 184 (N.J. 1936).

Pincite

182 A. 618 (McMurtry v. Schneider) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.