Legal Opinion

Day v. Kingsland

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided September 2, 1898PublishedCited by 5 opinions

On bill for specific performance, Ac.

1Opinion of the Court

Embry, V. C.

This is a bill by the vendor for the specific performance of a written agreement for the purchase of lands against the vendee, who refuses to accept the deed and carry out the agreement upon the ground that the complainant’s title to the lands is not marketable. • Complainant’s title to the lands is derived through proceedings for the partition of lands between the heirs of one Daniel Riggs. Daniel Riggs, who died seized of the premises in the year 1786, by his will, dated in October of that year, devised the premises in question to his son, Benjamin, and his heirs, with the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Greenblatt v. . HermannNew York Court of Appeals · 1894

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Casriel v. KingNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1948
  2. Gaub v. Nassau Homes, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
  3. Williams v. HefnerMontana Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Rehoboth Heights Development Co. v. MarshallCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1927
  5. BOR. OF E. RUTHERFORD v. SisselmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API