Newark Aqueduct Co. v. Joralemon

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Newark Aqueduct Co. v. Joralemon

7 N.J. Eq. 304

DecidedDecember 15, 1848

StatusPublished

This text of 7 N.J. Eq. 304 (Newark Aqueduct Co. v. Joralemon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Newark Aqueduct Co. v. Joralemon, 7 N.J. Eq. 304 (N.J. Ct. App. 1848).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

The consideration money having been paid by James N. Joralemon, the conveyance to Samuel, in trust for the infant son of James, was voluntary; and the facts show that it was for an improper purpose. The subsequent purchaser, Smith, who took the conveyance from Samuel, was a bona fide purchaser without actual notice of the trust; and the certificate of the Clerk, on the faith of which he purchased, represented the deed to Samuel to be an absolute deed, unlimited by any trust. Smith’s equity is superior to that of the infant. His title will be established.

Decree accordingly.

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

The Chancellor.

The consideration money having been paid by James N. Joralemon, the conveyance to Samuel, in trust for the infant son of James, was voluntary; and the facts show that it was for an improper purpose. The subsequent purchaser, Smith, who took the conveyance from Samuel, was a bona fide purchaser without actual notice of the trust; and the certificate of the Clerk, on the faith of which he purchased, represented the deed to Samuel to be an absolute deed, unlimited by any trust. Smith’s equity is superior to that of the infant. His title will be established.

Decree accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 N.J. Eq. 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newark-aqueduct-co-v-joralemon-njch-1848.