Legal Opinion

Agens v. Agens

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided October 15, 1892PublishedCited by 7 opinions

On final hearing on bill and answer and proofs taken orally.

1Opinion of the Court

Van Fleet, V. C.

Though several grounds of action are set forth- in the bill! itt this case, the only evidence produced by the complainant on the hearing in support of them is such as is found in a mutilated writing. This writing, before its mutilation and when in- its-original state, contained these words:

“ §29,536.96-100. Newark N. J., May 29th, 1877.
“ Due Thos. Agens Twenty Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Thinty Siis 96-100 Dollars for cash deposited in trust with mé Fredfc. G. Agens,”

*567But when it was put in evidence the last four letters of the defendant’s signature had been torn from it, so…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kane v. BloodgoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1823
  2. Sackett v. SpencerNew York Supreme Court · 1859

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Bovay v. H. M. Byllesby & Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1944
  2. Govan v. Trade Bank & Trust Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1970
  3. City of Camden v. South Jersey Port Com'nNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949
  4. Gibbs Building, C., Co. v. BellevilleNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
  5. Bahr v. Breeze Corps., Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1939

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API