Russell v. Russell
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey.
1Opinion of the Court
DALLAS, Circuit Judge.
The conclusion we have reached upon the question raised by the seventh specification of error is determinative, and no other will be considered. The Circuit Court adjudged that a certain indenture of antenuptial agreement, dated November 22, 1892, between John Russell of the first part, Herschell Mulford of the second part, and Lottie R. Brown of the third part, was “void and of no effect,” and ordered “that the same be delivered up to be canceled.” *841In a case in which the parties were the same as in this one, and in which the same relief was prayed, the Court of Chancery…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hughes v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Murray v. CharlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Nesbit v. Riverside Independent DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Johnson Co. v. WhartonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Baird v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Morris A. Hicks, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. The Quaker Oats CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Samara v. MatarCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
- Moran Towing & Transportation Co. v. Navigazione Libera Triestina, S. A.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Butcher v. Truck Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Blum v. William Goldman Theatres, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1949
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.