Taylor v. Borden

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Taylor v. Borden

91 A. 1071, 82 N.J. Eq. 369, 12 Buchanan 369, 1913 N.J. LEXIS 374

DecidedOctober 16, 1913

StatusPublished

This text of 91 A. 1071 (Taylor v. Borden) 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

Taylor v. Borden, 91 A. 1071, 82 N.J. Eq. 369, 12 Buchanan 369, 1913 N.J. LEXIS 374 (N.J. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The testimony in the cause fully sustains the facts found by the learned vice-chancellor. Upon those facts the complainant was clearly entitled to the relief granted to him. The decree appealed from will be affirmed.

For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenohard, Parker, Bergen, Yoorhees, Kalisch, YredenBURGH, CONGDON, TeRI-IUNE, HePPENI-IETMER—12. For reversal—None.

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

Per Curiam.

The testimony in the cause fully sustains the facts found by the learned vice-chancellor. Upon those facts the complainant was clearly entitled to the relief granted to him. The decree appealed from will be affirmed.

For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenohard, Parker, Bergen, Yoorhees, Kalisch, YredenBURGH, CONGDON, TeRI-IUNE, HePPENI-IETMER—12. For reversal—None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A. 1071, 82 N.J. Eq. 369, 12 Buchanan 369, 1913 N.J. LEXIS 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-borden-nj-1913.