Prisco v. Prisco
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On appeal from a decree in the court “One of the deeds of conveyance which is challenged in this case was made by Palmyra Tee and Coal Company to complainant January 20th, 1913, and recorded February 19th, 1913; the other, also challenged, was made by William L." F. Gsand to complainant July 16th, 1913, and recorded July 19th, 1913. Both deeds express money considerations and declarations to the use of the grantee.
Read the full summary
On appeal from a decree in the court “One of the deeds of conveyance which is challenged in this case was made by Palmyra Tee and Coal Company to complainant January 20th, 1913, and recorded February 19th, 1913; the other, also challenged, was made by William L." F. Gsand to complainant July 16th, 1913, and recorded July 19th, 1913. Both deeds express money considerations and declarations to the use of the grantee. Tt is, however, conceded that the consideration of these deeds was paid by the father of the complainant and that the complainant was at that time only sixteen years of age. “The…
1Per curiam
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Learning.
For affirmance — Tiie Chief-Justice, Swayze, Treno hard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisci-i, Black, White, HepPENUETMER, WILLIAMS, GARDNER — 12.
For reversal — None.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Amratlal C. Bhagat v. Bharat A. Bhagat (068312)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2014
- Strong v. StrongNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1944
- TURRO EX REL. TURRO v. TurroNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
- Ringold v. RingoldNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1922
- Michalski v. MichalskiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.