Legal Opinion

Reeves v. McCracken

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided March 18, 1905PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stevens, V. C.

This bill is filed against John H. McCracken and liis wife, Selena A. McCracken, mainly for an account. There are three other defendants, but it is admitted that they are bona fide purchasers for value and that no decree can be made against them.

Briefly summarized, the bill states:

1. That complainant conveyed to John IT. McCracken 157, 157% and 159 Boyd street, 223 Belmont avenue, 67 and 69 Astor street, and 580 Clinton avenue, and that tins conveyance was subsequently fortified by a conveyance by the sheriff. These properties have since been sold, either by McCracken or by the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chapman v. Forsyth & LimerickSupreme Court of the United States · 1844
  2. Crawford v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  3. Hennequin v. ClewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  4. Noble v. HammondSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  5. Palmer v. HusseySupreme Court of the United States · 1886

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hubbard v. Bibb Brokerage Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
  2. East Newark Realty Corp. v. DolanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
  3. Shapiro v. MarziglianoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API