Sutton v. Sutton

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Sutton v. Sutton

90 A. 280, 82 N.J. Eq. 648, 12 Buchanan 648, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 348

DecidedMarch 16, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 90 A. 280 (Sutton v. Sutton) 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

Sutton v. Sutton, 90 A. 280, 82 N.J. Eq. 648, 12 Buchanan 648, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 348 (N.J. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree of the-court of chancery will be affirmed, for the reasons given by the learned advisory master.

There has been some criticism in the argument and brief, of certain details of his findings of fact as unsupported by the evidence. We have examined the evidence in the ease and. find no errors of fact in the conclusions of the master that operate in any way to impair the correctness of the result reached by him, or that call for airy special comment on our part.

The award of a counsel fee below is likewise affirmed.

For affirmance—-The Chief-Justice, Swatze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Mtnturn, Kalisci-i, Bogbrt, Vredenburgh, Congdon, White, Heppenheimer—12. For reversal—None.

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

Per Curiam.

The decree of the-court of chancery will be affirmed, for the reasons given by the learned advisory master.

There has been some criticism in the argument and brief, of certain details of his findings of fact as unsupported by the evidence. We have examined the evidence in the ease and. find no errors of fact in the conclusions of the master that operate in any way to impair the correctness of the result reached by him, or that call for airy special comment on our part.

The award of a counsel fee below is likewise affirmed.

For affirmance—-The Chief-Justice, Swatze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Mtnturn, Kalisci-i, Bogbrt, Vredenburgh, Congdon, White, Heppenheimer—12. For reversal—None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A. 280, 82 N.J. Eq. 648, 12 Buchanan 648, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutton-v-sutton-nj-1914.