Warren v. Warren
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Learning, whose opinion is reported ante p. 346. The bill states that by deed dated March 16th, 1844, Richard Warren, in consideration of natural love and affection for his wife Susan and his children Richard, George, William, Emeline, John, Robert and Mary, and of the sum of fifty cents, did grant, bargain, sell and convey unto Frederick Knighton certain described lands in the county of Merc'er,…
Read the full summary
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Learning, whose opinion is reported ante p. 346. The bill states that by deed dated March 16th, 1844, Richard Warren, in consideration of natural love and affection for his wife Susan and his children Richard, George, William, Emeline, John, Robert and Mary, and of the sum of fifty cents, did grant, bargain, sell and convey unto Frederick Knighton certain described lands in the county of Merc'er, together with the buildings, * * * hereditaments, &c. “In trust nevertheless that he, the said Frederick Knighton, his…
1Per curiam
The decree of the court of chancery is affirmed, for the reasons ■stated in the memorandum opinion of Vice-Chancellor Learning.
For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Ivalisch, Black, White, Teri-iune, Heppenheimer, Williams, Taylor—14. For reversal—None.
2Cited by1 opinion
- In Re DanieckiNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935