Hancock v. Elmer
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On bill, answer and proofs. The defendant Newton Elmer, for several years before the month of September, 1897, was, with one Albertson, indebted on their joint note to the complainant, Benjamin Hancock, for $875, which, by partial payments, has been reduced to $700. In 1896' Albertson’s wife conveyed a lot of land to Newton to secure him against the Hancock note.
Read the full summary
On bill, answer and proofs. The defendant Newton Elmer, for several years before the month of September, 1897, was, with one Albertson, indebted on their joint note to the complainant, Benjamin Hancock, for $875, which, by partial payments, has been reduced to $700. In 1896' Albertson’s wife conveyed a lot of land to Newton to secure him against the Hancock note. Elmer then gave his note to Hancock, and Albertson was released from liability, the express purpose of the conveyance being, as stated, to secure Elmer for undertaking to pay Albertson’s half of the note. In August, 1897, the note,…
1Opinion of the Court
Grey, Y. C.
It is admitted, without contention, that the defendant Newton Elmer was indebted to the complainant at the time he made the deeds attacked in this cause. It is also admitted, without dispute, that, shortly after the complainant demanded of Newton Elmer the payment of his debt, the latter conveyed all his property (except one lot hereafter dealt with), by the two deeds in question, one to his brother, the defendant Lafayette Elmer, passing title to six lots of land, the other to his brother, the defendant Ellison Elmer, passing title to twenty-two lots of land. Newton also…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Haberstroh v. De MarcoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949