Legal Opinion

State v. Foster Wheeler Corp.

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided September 7, 1943No. Docket 141/165PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendants, Foster Wheeler Corporation and Commercial Trust Company, executor under the will of Orray E. Thurber, deceased, assert that the amended bill filed in the present cause is deficient in alleging an equitable cause of action against either of them, and they insist that they should not be obliged to answer.

In resisting motions of this character, frequently, as here, affidavits are presented on behalf of the complainant verifying and indeed amplifying and supplementing the factual charges of the bill. Where the motion rests upon the ground that the bill fails to state a cause of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Riley v. HodgkinsNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1898
  2. Courter v. Crescent Sewing Machine Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1900
  3. United New Jersey Railroad & Canal Co. v. HoppockSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1877
  4. Belmont Lumber Co. v. FriedmanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1929
  5. Brown v. GaskillNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1908

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Arcell v. Ashland Chemical Co., Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977
  2. Lippmann v. Hydro-Space Technology, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
  3. Orrok v. ParmigianiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
  4. Maihack v. MehlNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1948
  5. Mianulli v. GunaganNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954

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