Schoenberg v. O'Connor

185 A. 382, 116 N.J.L. 398, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 267
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedMay 14, 1936
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 185 A. 382 (Schoenberg v. O'Connor) 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.

Bluebook
Schoenberg v. O'Connor, 185 A. 382, 116 N.J.L. 398, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 267 (N.J. 1936).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur in the view of. Judge Ackerson that plaintiff was entitled to rescind the contract of sale, because of the “unmarketability of title.” Under the circumstances, he properly invoked the principle declared in Eisler v. Halperin, 89 N. J. L. 278, that, if acceptance of the proffered title would lay the *399 vendee “open to a fair probability of vexatious litigation with the possibility of serious loss,” the title is unmarketable, and the vendee is justified in refusing to accept it.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

United States v. Roebling
244 F. Supp. 736 (D. New Jersey, 1965)
Pt. Pleasant Manor Building Co. v. Brown
126 A.2d 219 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 A. 382, 116 N.J.L. 398, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schoenberg-v-oconnor-nj-1936.