Silzer v. New Brunswick Trust Co.

192 A. 510, 121 N.J. Eq. 611, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 561
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided April 30, 1937·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur in the conclusion of the learned vice-chancellor that the bill should be dismissed for want of equity.

The relationship between appellant and respondent was that of debtor and creditor. The bill does not, as contended by appellant, state a case for the termination of an express trust, and the execution of a resulting trust arising in consequence thereof; nor does it allege any other ground for equitable interposition. If the condition of the contract has been fulfilled, there is, so far as the bill discloses, an adequate remedy at law.

The decree is accordingly affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Hetpield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Cole, JJ. 15. For reversal — None.

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

Silzer v. New Brunswick Trust Co., 192 A. 510, 121 N.J. Eq. 611, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 561 (N.J. 1937).

192 A. 510 (Silzer v. New Brunswick Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.