Legal Opinion
City of Newark v. Yeskel
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided November 16, 1949PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] The plaintiff, the City of Newark, seeks specific performance of the defendant's agreement to purchase premises in the City of Newark for which the defendant was the highest bidder at a public sale conducted by the City under the provisions of the In Rem Tax Foreclosure Act (1948), R.S. 54:5-104.29 et seq. The defendant resists on the ground that the title is not marketable, in that it depends upon an antecedent foreclosure by the City of Newark of a tax sale…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Pennoyer v. NeffSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Bell's Gap Railroad v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- North Laramie Land Co. v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Winona & St. Peter Land Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Howes Bros. v. Unemployment Compensation CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schirmer-National Co. v. Director, Division of TaxationNew Jersey Tax Court · 1998
- Vincent, Inc. v. LambekNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Widmer v. Township of MahwahNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977