From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coltinuk v. Hockstein

Court of Errors and Appeals
Jan 19, 1925
97 N.J. Eq. 371 (N.J. 1925)

Opinion

Submitted October term, 1924.

Decided January 19th, 1925.

On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Church, whose opinion is reported in 95 N.J. Eq. 513.

Messrs. Dembe Dembe and Mr. Maximilian T. Rosenberg, for the appellants.

Mr. Carl T. Olsan and Mr. Merritt Lane, for the respondents.


The bill of complaint in this case was filed to compel specific performance of a contract to convey real estate, located in the city of Bayonne.

Our reading of the record and a consideration of the briefs lead us to the same conclusion as that of the vice-chancellor. viz., a decree for specific performance should be ordered.

The decree of the court of chancery is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, MINTURN, BLACK, KATZENBACH, LLOYD, CLARK, McGLENNON, JJ. 8.

For reversal — PARKER, CAMPBELL, WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, JJ. 6.


Summaries of

Coltinuk v. Hockstein

Court of Errors and Appeals
Jan 19, 1925
97 N.J. Eq. 371 (N.J. 1925)
Case details for

Coltinuk v. Hockstein

Case Details

Full title:ISAAC COLTINUK et ux., respondents, v. LENA HOCKSTEIN et ux., appellants

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Jan 19, 1925

Citations

97 N.J. Eq. 371 (N.J. 1925)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Bates

Since complainant tenders himself ready and willing to accept a conveyance subject to those liens (paragraph…