Commercial Trust, C., Bank v. Hamilton
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
No averments are to be found in the counter-claim either touching complainant's status or the relief sought, which were not available as a defense to the note in the law court to the same extent as in a court of equity. Even should the averments of paragraphs 4 and 5, above quoted, be deemed adequate to charge complainant with a knowledge of the fraud alleged touching the execution of the note, such fraud was available as a defense in the law court. Duncan, Sherman Co. v. Gilbert,29 N.J. Law 521; Hamilton v. Vought, 34 N.J. Law 187; Haines v. MerrillTrust Co., 56 N.J. Law 312; Mueller v.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Headley v. LeavittSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1903
- Gallagher v. Lembeck & Betz Eagle Brewing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1916
- O'Brien v. Paterson Brewing & Malting Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1905
- Clark v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1909
- Reeves v. CooperNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1859
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Falcon B. L. Assn. v. SchwartzNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1936
- Simon v. HenkeNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
- In Re HosfordNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
- Metropolitan Life Ins. v. SchneiderDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1940
- Ollendorf v. HirschNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.