Legal Opinion

Van Buren v. Fine

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided December 5, 1927PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Touching the merits of this case I am unable to escape the conviction that the reason and only reason defendant vendee failed to carry out the terms of his contract of purchase was his inability or disinclination to finance the purchase in a falling market.

By way of defense on the part of the vendee it is claimed that one Lipsitz was employed by complainant vendor to effect a sale of the property here in question and made false representations to Lipsitz touching the income of the business, which false representations were repeated by Lipsitz to defendant prior to the execution of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Headley v. LeavittSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1903
  2. Gallagher v. Lembeck & Betz Eagle Brewing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1916
  3. Maturi v. FaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1925
  4. Claron v. ThommessenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1924
  5. B. Holding Co. v. DuboisNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1927

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Ray v. Beneficial Fin. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1966
  2. Levy v. Massachusetts Accident Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1938
  3. Iback v. Elevator Supplies Co., Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935
  4. DIAL PRESS, INC. v. PhillipsNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  5. Lizak v. RottenbucherNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1947

5 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