From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kuskin v. Guttman

Court of Errors and Appeals
Apr 1, 1926
99 N.J. Eq. 887 (N.J. 1926)

Opinion

Decided April 1st, 1926.

On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Berry, whose opinion is reported in 98 N.J. Eq. 617.

Mr. Edward R. McGlynn, for the appellants.

Messrs. McCarter English and L. Benjamin Glueckfield, for the respondents.


The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Berry.

For affirmance — TRENCHARD, PARKER, KALISCH, BLACK, KATZENBACH, CAMPBELL, WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

Kuskin v. Guttman

Court of Errors and Appeals
Apr 1, 1926
99 N.J. Eq. 887 (N.J. 1926)
Case details for

Kuskin v. Guttman

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS KUSKIN et al., appellants, v. MILTON GUTTMAN et al., respondents

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Apr 1, 1926

Citations

99 N.J. Eq. 887 (N.J. 1926)

Citing Cases

N.J. Title Guarantee Trust Co. v. Berliner

See 1 Daniell, Pl. Pr. ( 6thAm. ed.) 324 note (a); Kuskin v. Guttman, 98 N.J. Eq. 617;affirmed, 99 N.J. Eq.…

Morgan Realty Co. v. Pazen

To warrant such a decree it would have to be shown that the contract was complete in all its material parts;…