History
  • No items yet
midpage
Schecktman v. Schecktman
98 N.J. Eq. 695
| N.J. | 1925
|
Check Treatment

Our examination of the evidence in this case convinces us that the moneys received by the wife from her husband were not a gift, and that when later they were placed to the husband's credit in his bank or used to pay the dues on building association stock standing in his name, it was but the application of his own funds. In this view of the facts and their import it is unnecessary to determine the legal effect of the application of the funds to the husband's account in bank or to the payment of his building association dues on the assumption that the moneys were originally a gift from the husband to the wife.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, MINTURN, KALISCH, BLACK, KATZENBACH, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

*Page 696

Case Details

Case Name: Schecktman v. Schecktman
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: Sep 19, 1925
Citation: 98 N.J. Eq. 695
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.