History
  • No items yet
midpage
Morrow v. Smith
115 N.J. Eq. 310
| N.J. | 1934
|
Check Treatment

The decree appealed from is affirmed, for the reasons stated by Vice-Chancellor Berry in an opinion reported in 113 N.J. Eq. 12. By so doing, this court is not to be understood as approving the utterances of the learned vice-chancellor not pertinent to the disposition of the case and embodied in the last paragraph commencing on page 23 of the report and concluding on page 24. Suffice it to say that since the parties were before the court and it had jurisdiction it could, by virtue of the statute, reform an informality in the proceeding.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, DILL, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None. *Page 311

Case Details

Case Name: Morrow v. Smith
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: Feb 5, 1934
Citation: 115 N.J. Eq. 310
Court Abbreviation: N.J.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.