Miller v. Reich
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
An explanatory disclosure of the modus operandi by which this cause was submitted to me for decision is prerequisite. The hearing of the cause having been referred to me, an application was made for the designation of a date for the final hearing. Whereupon the solicitors announced that the substantial controversial issue between the parties presents solely a question of law, and that the basic and material facts are adequately and truly reported by the pleadings. The solicitors therefore stipulated that the cause be submitted and determined upon the acknowledged facts disclosed by the bill,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Swetland v. SwetlandNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Swetland v. SwetlandSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1928
- Penrose v. Absecon Land Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1923
- Kicey v. KiceyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
- Barry v. TunickSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1925
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bartel v. ClarenbachNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1971
- In Re Estates of FernandezNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1980
- Shuster v. Bd. of Education of Hardwick Tp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Estate of Lansing v. StateNew Jersey Tax Court · 1983