Van Horn v. Demarest

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Van Horn v. Demarest

77 A. 369, 77 N.J. Eq. 264, 1910 N.J. LEXIS 272

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedJune 20, 1910

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 77 A. 369 (Van Horn v. Demarest) 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

Van Horn v. Demarest, 77 A. 369, 77 N.J. Eq. 264, 1910 N.J. LEXIS 272 (N.J. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decreepn this ease should be affirmed, for the reasons given by Vice-Chancellor Stevenson. We are not to be understood, however, as holding that the case was one of equitable jurisdiction. Ho objection was made on this ground, and it would be wrong to dismiss the bill for that reason at this stage of the proceedings.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Voorhees, Minturn, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Vroom, Gray, Dili, Congdon — 14.

For reversal — Hone.

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

Per Curiam.

The decreepn this ease should be affirmed, for the reasons given by Vice-Chancellor Stevenson. We are not to be understood, however, as holding that the case was one of equitable jurisdiction. Ho objection was made on this ground, and it would be wrong to dismiss the bill for that reason at this stage of the proceedings.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Voorhees, Minturn, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Vroom, Gray, Dili, Congdon — 14.

For reversal — Hone.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 A. 369, 77 N.J. Eq. 264, 1910 N.J. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-horn-v-demarest-nj-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack