Pound v. Pleister

153 A. 907, 107 N.J. Eq. 577
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided February 5, 1931·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

This is an action for specific performance and the learned vice-chancellor dismissed the bill of complaint, from which decree so advised the complainant below appeals.

Without going into details it is sufficient to say that we conclude that the opinion of this court in Lennig v. OceanCity Association, 41 N.J. Eq. 606, is controlling and for that reason the decree below is affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DALY, VAN BUSKIRK, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None. *Page 578

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

Pound v. Pleister, 153 A. 907, 107 N.J. Eq. 577 (N.J. 1931).

153 A. 907 (Pound v. Pleister) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Picconi v. Carlin
123 A.2d 87 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1956)
Casriel v. King
58 A.2d 269 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1948)
Caparell v. Goodbody
29 A.2d 563 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1942)
Webster-Art Strength B. L. Assn. v. Armondo
15 A.2d 890 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1940)
Neiwirth v. Goldfarb
164 A. 561 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1933)