Stillman v. Johnson

55 N.J. Eq. 592
New Jersey Court of Chancery·Decided March 15, 1897·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Cijriam.

Decree affirmed, for the reasons given in the court of chancery.

Stillman v. Johnson—

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Collins, Depue, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Lippincott, Ludlow, Van Syckel, Bogert, Dayton, Hendrickson, Nixon — 13.

For reversal — None.

Freshmuth v. Johnson—

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Collins, Depue, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Lippincott, Ludlow, Van Syckel, Bogert, Dayton, Hendrickson, Nixon — 13.

For reversal — None.

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

Stillman v. Johnson, 55 N.J. Eq. 592 (N.J. Ct. App. 1897).

55 N.J. Eq. 592 (Stillman v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

First Camden Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Broadbent
168 A.2d 677 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1961)
Busch v. Plews
88 A.2d 264 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1952)
Rowe v. Rowe
167 A. 16 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1933)