Legal Opinion
Martin v. Martin
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Decided May 14, 1930PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The bill herein has been filed by a wife against her husband and seeks partition of certain personal property. Defendant husband opposes.
Partition is sought of two separate funds of money. I have reached the conclusion that one of these funds may be partitioned, but that the other may not.
The former fund is $5,795.50 on deposit with defendant Camden Safe Deposit and Trust Company. This money was deposited by the husband in that banking institution and by him and his wife made subject to withdrawal in accordance with the terms of a signature card which was signed by both parties, which card…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Sears v. ChoateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Cuthbert v. . ChauvetNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- In re ThurstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Tilton v. DavidsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1903
- Grassman v. BadgleyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hotchkin v. HotchkinNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1969
- Reitmeier v. KalinoskiDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1986
- Ampere Bank and Trust Co. v. EsterlyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1946
- In Re KuserNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1942
- Speth v. SpethNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.