Legal Opinion
Elgart v. Mintz
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided March 17, 1938PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The facts giving rise to this controversy are correctly stated by counsel for the defendant Mintz in his brief as follows:
The original bill of complaint alleged that complainant and defendant are both residents of the State of New York; that complainant instituted his suit in our supreme court against the defendant to recover $10,850 due him under a contract; that the defendant owns one hundred and sixty shares of stock in the Elblum Holding Corporation, a domestic corporation, which he threatened to put beyond the reach of complainant, and that complainant knows of no other assets of…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Pennoyer v. NeffSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- First Nat. Bank of Boston v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Rogers v. Guaranty Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Direction Der Disconto-Gesellschaft v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Simpson v. . Jersey City Contracting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Standard Oil Co. v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Fuller v. OstruskeWashington Supreme Court · 1956
- Hodes v. HodesOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Knight, Exr. v. ShutzOhio Supreme Court · 1943
- Swanson v. SwansonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.