Legal Opinion

McCullough v. Ward

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided November 11, 1909Published

On several demurrers of Loretta Plunkett and Michael Reilly to bill for partition.

1Opinion of the Court

Leaming, Y. C.

1. The bill having been amended by the elimination of the clause relating to unknown descendants of deceased brothers and sisters of Jane Reilly, the demurrer of Lauretta Plunkett presents the single objection that tenants by the curtesy initiate are not proper parties defendant to a bill for partition of real estate.

It is unnecessary to give consideration to the merits of the objection here urged. Por a misjoinder of parties as defendants, those can only demur who are improperly joined. Story Eq. Pl. § 544; Miller v. Jamison, 24 N. J. Eq. (9 C. E. Gr.) 41, 44; Herman & Grace v.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Grace v. Board of Chosen FreeholdersNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API