Monahan v. McElligott
This text of 44 A.2d 30 (Monahan v. McElligott) 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.
Opinion
This is a purchasers’ suit for specific performance of a contract to convey real estate. The defense in substance was that there was not a completed contract (1) because the husband’s signature was affixed to the paper by his wife; and (2) that a formal contract was contemplated but never executed.
The Vice-Chancellor held in substance that the paper relied on was legally sufficient in form, and that the wife’s signature for the husband was binding, although authorized by him only by parol.
Our examination of the case and briefs (there was no oral argument) leads to a concurrence in that decision, both as to matters of law and fact, and the decree under review will accordingly be affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hehbr, Perskie, Colie, Oliphant, Wells, Eafferty, Dill, Freund, McGeehan, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
44 A.2d 30, 137 N.J. Eq. 176, 1945 N.J. LEXIS 421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monahan-v-mcelligott-nj-1945.