Van Derveer v. Tallman

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Van Derveer v. Tallman

1 N.J. Eq. 9

DecidedApril 15, 1830

StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.J. Eq. 9 (Van Derveer v. Tallman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Van Derveer v. Tallman, 1 N.J. Eq. 9 (N.J. Ct. App. 1830).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

An injunction cannot issue against the purchasers by name, they not being parties to the bill. This is in accordance with the general rule. There is one case where a bill was filed against one set of tenants to restrain waste, and they were restrained ; another set commenced cutting, and they were injoined, though not parties: but the authorities extend only to tenants. The persons here are purchasers, and have a right to be heard. (Fellows v. Fellows, 4 Johnson’s Ch. Rep. 25.)

Injunction allowed as to Hancock; refused as to the purchasers.

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

The Chancellor.

An injunction cannot issue against the purchasers by name, they not being parties to the bill. This is in accordance with the general rule. There is one case where a bill was filed against one set of tenants to restrain waste, and they were restrained ; another set commenced cutting, and they were injoined, though not parties: but the authorities extend only to tenants. The persons here are purchasers, and have a right to be heard. (Fellows v. Fellows, 4 Johnson’s Ch. Rep. 25.)

Injunction allowed as to Hancock; refused as to the purchasers.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.J. Eq. 9, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-derveer-v-tallman-njch-1830.