Legal Opinion
Elgart v. Mintz
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Decided July 1, 1938PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
With one essential difference the subject-matter and the facts of the present litigation are the same as in Elgart v. Mintz, reported in 123 N.J. Eq. 404. That difference is that in the previous cause the order to show cause had been served upon the defendant, Mintz, outside the State of New Jersey whereas in the instant case the order was served upon him within this state. The present bill of complaint was filed by leave of court after the former bill was dismissed.
Both complainant and defendant live in New York. The complainant, alleging that the defendant owes him $10,850, has brought suit…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Rogers v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Pierce v. Old Dominion Copper Mining & Smelting Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1904
- Elgart v. MintzNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1938
- Hermann v. Mexican Petroleum Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1915
- Wilson v. American Palace Car Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1903
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Jurewicz v. Locals 1297, C., of AmericaNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1946