Legal Opinion

Barry v. Ruskin

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 17, 1926PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The complainant Belier is the assignee of the complainant Barry, and seeks the specific performance of a contract for the sale of land in the city of Newark by the defendant, who agreed to convey to Barry. The contract is dated June 5th, 1925, and its terms are not in dispute. It provided for settlement on September 1st, 1925. Time was not made of the essence of the contract by its terms. The contract was assigned to Beiler by Barry on July 22d 1925, but the defendant had no notice of this assignment. The complainant-assignee was not ready for settlement on September 1st, because of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Orange Society of New Jerusalem v. KonskiNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1923
  2. Orange Society v. KonskiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1923
  3. King v. RuckmanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1869
  4. Huffman v. HummerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1865

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Stamato v. AgamieSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1957
  2. Korb v. Spray Beach Hotel Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  3. Reade v. McKennaNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
  4. Vacca v. WilkensNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1931
  5. Korb v. Spray Beach Hotel Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API