History
  • No items yet
midpage
Schweitzer v. Schneider
86 N.J. Eq. 256
N.J.
1916
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

The decree of the court of chancery is affirmed, for the reasons stated by the vice-chancellor in his opinion which is not to be taken as deciding that the funds in controversy were not charged with a trust in the hands of the respondents, as a superficial reading might indicate, but rather as defining the class of persons for whose benefit such trust exists, while denying that it exists for the .benefit of a certain other class.

No. 26—

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayee, Trenohard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, White, Terhune, Heppenpieimee, Williams, Taylor, Gardner — 15.

For reversal — Fone.

*257No. 27—

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisce, Black, White, Terhune, Heppenheimer, Williams, Taylor, Gardner — 15.

For reversal — None.

Case Details

Case Name: Schweitzer v. Schneider
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: Jun 19, 1916
Citation: 86 N.J. Eq. 256
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.