From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Austin J. Waldron, Inc. v. Cutley

Court of Errors and Appeals
Feb 3, 1930
148 A. 916 (N.J. 1930)

Opinion

Decided February 3d 1930.

On appeal from the court of chancery.

Mr. Elmer W. Romine, for the appellant.

Messrs. Pilgrim Ritger, for the respondent.


The vice-chancellor found that the false representations alleged to have been made as an inducement to the making of the contract in this case were not proved. 105 N.J. Eq. 586. In this we concur. This being true, it is unnecessary to pass upon his further conclusion of law that even if proved such representations would not constitute a defense to the bill for specific performance.

The decree is affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, KALISCH, BLACK, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

Austin J. Waldron, Inc. v. Cutley

Court of Errors and Appeals
Feb 3, 1930
148 A. 916 (N.J. 1930)
Case details for

Austin J. Waldron, Inc. v. Cutley

Case Details

Full title:AUSTIN J. WALDRON, INCORPORATED, complainant-respondent, v. JULIETTE V…

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Feb 3, 1930

Citations

148 A. 916 (N.J. 1930)
148 A. 916

Citing Cases

Corson v. Keane

Does "negotiating" require the conducting by a broker of all proceedings in a transaction from the initial…