Swetland v. Swetland

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Swetland v. Swetland

153 A. 907, 107 N.J. Eq. 504

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedFebruary 5, 1931

StatusPublished

Cited by15 cases

This text of 153 A. 907 (Swetland v. Swetland) 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

Swetland v. Swetland, 153 A. 907, 107 N.J. Eq. 504 (N.J. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

These appeals by Maurice J. Swetland, as trustee, are in the one instance from two orders of the court of chancery, made on an opinion of Vice-Chancellor Berry, reported in 105 N.J. Eq. 608, and in the other instance from two orders of the prerogative court made on the opinion of the same vice-chancellor, sitting as vice-ordinary, reported in 105 N.J. Eq. 603. The appeals are related and were argued together. We affirm throughout for the reasons stated in the opinions below; except that in reaching our conclusions we do not find it necessary to determine the character or the effect of the special appearances entered below in behalf of the appellant, and we therefore express no opinion thereon.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None. *Page 505

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

These appeals by Maurice J. Swetland, as trustee, are in the one instance from two orders of the court of chancery, made on an opinion of Vice-Chancellor Berry, reported in 105 N.J. Eq. 608, and in the other instance from two orders of the prerogative court made on the opinion of the same vice-chancellor, sitting as vice-ordinary, reported in 105 N.J. Eq. 603. The appeals are related and were argued together. We affirm throughout for the reasons stated in the opinions below; except that in reaching our conclusions we do not find it necessary to determine the character or the effect of the special appearances entered below in behalf of the appellant, and we therefore express no opinion thereon.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None. *Page 505

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 A. 907, 107 N.J. Eq. 504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swetland-v-swetland-nj-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack