Personette v. Johnson

40 N.J. Eq. 532
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Personette v. Johnson. Read the opinion of the Court — 40 N.J. Eq. 173
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division·Decided October 15, 1885·Published

Opinion

The Obdinaby.

By the terms of the order giving permission to the parties to-take testimony to be used on the hearing of the appeal, the testimony to be taken under the order was to be confined to-proof that, when the order to sell lands was made, the debts of the estate had been paid, and proof of the reason why the testimony was not adduced in the orphans court.- The claim of Mr. Pilch had not been paid. A very considerable amount of testimony was taken in reference to it, notwithstanding the objection of the appellant’s counsel. That testimony was clearly irrelevant and not within the limitation of the order. The respondents should be required to pay for taking and printing, it. The motion is granted, without costs.

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

Personette v. Johnson, 40 N.J. Eq. 532 (N.J. Ct. App. 1885).

40 N.J. Eq. 532 (Personette v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.