Legal Opinion

Gault v. Gault

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided November 29, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Petitioner moves the court to adjudge the surety on a neexeat bond in contempt for failure to comply with an order of the court declaring the bond forfeited and directing the surety to pay the amount due thereon. The bond is in the form permitted by chancery rule 216. The order forfeiting the bond and directing payment by the surety is a final decree in a summary proceeding; it corresponds with the judgment on scire facias on a recognizance in a law court. Elliott v. Elliott,36 Atl. Rep. 951; Schreiber v. Schreiber, 85 N.J. Eq. 303; affirmed, 86 N.J. Eq. 437. The question is, how may the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Schreiber v. SchreiberNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1915
  2. Aspinwall v. AspinwallSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1895
  3. Schreiber v. SchreiberSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1916

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re TrombleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Moss v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Beekwilder v. BeekwilderNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
  4. Burack v. MayersNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1937
  5. Moss v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API