From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zelley v. Shisler

COURT OF CHANCERY OF NEW JERSEY
Dec 3, 1924
128 A. 926 (Ch. Div. 1924)

Opinion

12-03-1924

Herbert ZELLEY, Trading as Zelley Motor Company, Complainant v. Mae SHISLER and Clifford Shisler, Defendants.

Wells & Tomlinson, of Trenton, for complainant. George M. Hillman, of Mt. Holly, for defendants.


On final hearing.

Wells & Tomlinson, of Trenton, for complainant.

George M. Hillman, of Mt. Holly, for defendants.

BUCHANAN, V. C. Complainant's bill is for decree for specific performance of a contract alleged to have been made by both defendants with complainant. The proofs at the hearing entitled complainant to decree against the defendant Mae Shisler, but are in my opinion insufficient to establish either that the defendant Clifford Shisler was an actual party to the contract, or that he has estopped himself from denying that he was a party to the contract. As to him, complainant is not entitled to relief. Under the circumstances of the case, no costs will be allowed to either party.


Summaries of

Zelley v. Shisler

COURT OF CHANCERY OF NEW JERSEY
Dec 3, 1924
128 A. 926 (Ch. Div. 1924)
Case details for

Zelley v. Shisler

Case Details

Full title:Herbert ZELLEY, Trading as Zelley Motor Company, Complainant v. Mae…

Court:COURT OF CHANCERY OF NEW JERSEY

Date published: Dec 3, 1924

Citations

128 A. 926 (Ch. Div. 1924)