McVickar v. Taylor

Supreme Court of New Jersey

McVickar v. Taylor

187 A. 144, 121 N.J. Eq. 111

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided October 5, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This appeal is from a decree of the court of chancery in a foreclosure suit. The defendants admitted the execution and delivery of the bond and mortgage, but denied there was any consideration therefor, or that any money or thing of value was ever paid or received thereon.

The vice-chancellor found no merit in the defendants’ contention, and we think there was ample proof to support this conclusion.

The decree is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chiee-Justioe, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 14. For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

This appeal is from a decree of the court of chancery in a foreclosure suit. The defendants admitted the execution and delivery of the bond and mortgage, but denied there was any consideration therefor, or that any money or thing of value was ever paid or received thereon.

The vice-chancellor found no merit in the defendants’ contention, and we think there was ample proof to support this conclusion.

The decree is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chiee-Justioe, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 14. For reversal — None.

McVickar v. Taylor, 187 A. 144, 121 N.J. Eq. 111 (N.J. 1936).

Pincite

187 A. 144 (McVickar v. Taylor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.