Crane v. Ely
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Art action of assumpsit was commenced in the supreme court by the appellants, Robert C. Crane and John M, Crane, against the respondent, Enoch A. Ely, to recover the sum of $4,077.21, balance of an account stated in the bill of particulars annexed to the declaration. The items of this account on the plaintiff’s side were three promissory notes, a check, cash loaned and goods sold and delivered. Credits are allowed to the defendant, Ely, for notes, checks, goods and sundries.
Read the full summary
Art action of assumpsit was commenced in the supreme court by the appellants, Robert C. Crane and John M, Crane, against the respondent, Enoch A. Ely, to recover the sum of $4,077.21, balance of an account stated in the bill of particulars annexed to the declaration. The items of this account on the plaintiff’s side were three promissory notes, a check, cash loaned and goods sold and delivered. Credits are allowed to the defendant, Ely, for notes, checks, goods and sundries. The difference between the debits and credits, with interest 'thereon, make the -amount demanded by the plaintiff in…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
SCUDDER, J.
Two questions have been discussed by the counsel on the argument of this appeal, and they were the only points considered in the opinion of the vice-chancellor, who advised the holding of the injunction : first, does the bill show such a case as will justify a court of equity in withdrawing the litigation from a court of law where it was commenced ? second, if it does not, does the answer make up for the want of equity in the bill, and can it be used for that purpose? Upon the first point there is little to be said in addition to what was…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. SternNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1938
- Pine Building Co. v. GrossmanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
- Eatontown v. HendricksonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1931