Woodbury Heights Land Co. v. Loudenslager
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On-appeal from an order advised by Vice-Chancellor Reed, who filed the following memorandum: This petition cannot be regarded as one to set off a judgment to be obtained against the complainant against the subsisting decree standing against the complainant in favor of the complainant. To a judgment or decree there can be no s.et-off of a debt not in judgment or decree. Waterm.
Read the full summary
On-appeal from an order advised by Vice-Chancellor Reed, who filed the following memorandum: This petition cannot be regarded as one to set off a judgment to be obtained against the complainant against the subsisting decree standing against the complainant in favor of the complainant. To a judgment or decree there can be no s.et-off of a debt not in judgment or decree. Waterm. Set-off § 822. ' The purpose of the petition is to have the decree modified upon the ground that the defendant was charged with sums which the complainant had covenanted to pay, but never did pay, as a part of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Garrison, J.
This is a petition filed in the court of chancery by the defendant in a cause that had been decided by this court and remitted for correction and execution.
The history of the litigation may be gathered from the reported opinions: Woodbury Heights Land Co. v. Loudenslager, 10 Dick. Ch. Rep. 78; Loudenslager v. Woodbury Heights Land Co., 11 Dick. Ch. Rep. 411; Woodbury Heights Land Co. v. Loudenslager, 13 Dick. Ch. Rep. 556.
Briefly restated for present purposes, the case is that Henry C. Loudenslager, while an officer of the Woodbury Heights…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson v. DavisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
- Friedman v. ZuckermanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1929
- Reinfeld v. Fidelity Union Trust Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1938
- Smith v. Colonial Woodworking Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1931