Pellitteri v. Mancuso
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
The aim of the bill is to accomplish a partition of a parcel of real estate known as No. 217 Pearl Street in the City of Trenton. The factual allegations of the pleadings assume imposing significance because the solicitors have resolved to submit the cause for hearing on the bill and answer. R.S. 2:29-47; N.J.S.A.2:29-47. In a hearing upon a bill and answer the uncontradicted factual allegations of the bill and the averments of the answer are accepted by the court as verities, and the decision is rendered upon the case thus presented. Groel v. UnitedElectric Company of New Jersey, 69 N.J. Eq.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Groel v. United Electric Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1905
- Alt v. KwiatekNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1941
- Walker v. BennettNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1930
- Brasko v. DuchekNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1940
- McLaughlin v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1871
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Skovborg v. SmithNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Yuritch v. YuritchNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1947