Legal Opinion

A. Hollander Son v. Jos. Hollander

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided February 14, 1935PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The matter under consideration here is whether the counter-claim of the defendants upon motion by the complainant should be dismissed. After setting forth the history of Joseph Hollander, Incorporated, the defendant corporation, and that of the individuals who were instrumental in organizing it, the counter-claim alleges in the ninth paragraph as follows:

"Several years last past the complainant, for the purpose of injuring the defendant Jos. Hollander, Incorporated, and in order to gain the customers, the trade and the business of the defendant corporation, or as much thereof as possible,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Boston Diatite Co. v. Florence Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
  2. Francis v. FlinnSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. Mayer v. Journeymen Stonecutters' Ass'nNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1890
  4. Mauger v. DickThe Superior Court of New York City · 1878

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McGovern v. Van RiperNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1945
  2. Devine v. DevineNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  3. John R. Thompson v. DelicatessenNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1939
  4. Weiss v. LevineNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1943
  5. Voltube Corp. v. B. & C. INSULATION PRODUCTSNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API