Buttlar v. Buttlar
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On final hearing on bill, answer and cross-bill and replication and proofs in open court.
1Opinion of the Court
Pitney, V. C.
The facts displayed and the questions arising on the pleadings may be briefly stated as follows:
In the year 1894 the complainant and defendant, being husband and wife, were seized in a joint estate of two parcels of real estate in Hudson county, one on Malone street in the town of West Hoboken, and one on First street in the city of Hoboken.
At that time they entered into a contract, in writing, for separate living, dated January 31st, 1894, and printed in ex-tenso in Buttlar v. Buttlar, 57 N. J. Eq. (12 Dick.) 650. *137The effect of that contract was to give the husband the rents and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Davis v. GravesNew York Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wantulok v. WantulokWyoming Supreme Court · 1950
- Daeschler v. DaeschlerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986
- Eberle v. SomonekNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
- Baker v. KennerupNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
- DiSANTOS. v. AdaseNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1971
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.