Staats v. Van Sickel
19 A. 261, 52 N.J.L. 370, 23 Vroom 370, 1890 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 59
This text of 19 A. 261 (Staats v. Van Sickel) 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
Staats v. Van Sickel, 19 A. 261, 52 N.J.L. 370, 23 Vroom 370, 1890 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 59 (N.J. 1890).
Opinion
Upon the admitted facts the wife acquired a legal interest in the lands conveyed to the husband; she, therefore, cannot stand purely as surety.
The case, we think, is ruled by the decision in the Court of Errors in Perkins v. Elliott, 8 C. E. Gr. 526.
The plaintiff must have judgment.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Reeves v. Morgan
48 N.J. Eq. 415 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1891)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
19 A. 261, 52 N.J.L. 370, 23 Vroom 370, 1890 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 59, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/staats-v-van-sickel-nj-1890.