Van Nest v. Van Nest
8 A.2d 558, 126 N.J. Eq. 234
Opinion
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion delivered by Vice-Chancellor Bigelow in the court of chancery.
For affirmance — The ' Chiee-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heiier, Perskie, Porter, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Hague, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Van Nest v. Van Nest, 8 A.2d 558, 126 N.J. Eq. 234 (N.J. 1939).
8 A.2d 558 (Van Nest v. Van Nest) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wilson v. Ray
538 P.2d 141 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1975)
Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. Robert
178 A.2d 185 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1962)
Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. Robert
171 A.2d 348 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1961)
In Re Hosford
98 A.2d 332 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)
Federal Trust Co. v. Walsh
90 A.2d 119 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1952)
Polliak v. Smith
88 A.2d 351 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1952)
In re the Estate of Frolich
88 A.2d 36 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1952)
Daly v. Rogers
27 A.2d 885 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1942)
Van Nest v. Van Nest
17 A.2d 592 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1941)