Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co.

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co.

23 A.2d 564, 130 N.J. Eq. 600, 1942 N.J. LEXIS 561

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedJanuary 9, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.2d 564 (Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co., 23 A.2d 564, 130 N.J. Eq. 600, 1942 N.J. LEXIS 561 (N.J. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed for the reasons expressed by Vice-Chancellor Stein, reported in 129 N. J. Eq. 389, in so far as the same lead to the view that the contract sued upon did not comprehend the omission in Keller’s *601 will to make final distribution of the two-fourths part of the corpus remaining over after the life estates of Josephine De Eonge and Annie Townsend Ashmore. Supporting citations on the proposition that in the distribution of personalty under R. S. 3:26-6 and R. S. 3:5-6 et seq., the half blood and the whole blood are on an equal footing are: In re Peake, 115 N. J. Eq. 233; affirmed, 116 N. J. Eq. 565; Smith v. McDonald, 71 N. J. Eq. 261; In re Tantum, 97 N. J. Eq. 271; In re Bell, 99 N. J. Eq. 835. For a review of the earlier authorities see In re Zeek, 40 N. J. L. J. 297.

We reserve opinion on the defense of laches.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hei-ier, Perskie, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Eafeerty, Hague, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed for the reasons expressed by Vice-Chancellor Stein, reported in 129 N. J. Eq. 389, in so far as the same lead to the view that the contract sued upon did not comprehend the omission in Keller’s *601 will to make final distribution of the two-fourths part of the corpus remaining over after the life estates of Josephine De Eonge and Annie Townsend Ashmore. Supporting citations on the proposition that in the distribution of personalty under R. S. 3:26-6 and R. S. 3:5-6 et seq., the half blood and the whole blood are on an equal footing are: In re Peake, 115 N. J. Eq. 233; affirmed, 116 N. J. Eq. 565; Smith v. McDonald, 71 N. J. Eq. 261; In re Tantum, 97 N. J. Eq. 271; In re Bell, 99 N. J. Eq. 835. For a review of the earlier authorities see In re Zeek, 40 N. J. L. J. 297.

We reserve opinion on the defense of laches.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hei-ier, Perskie, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Eafeerty, Hague, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.2d 564, 130 N.J. Eq. 600, 1942 N.J. LEXIS 561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-westfield-trust-co-njsuperctappdiv-1942.