Legal Opinion

Davis v. Scharf

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 11, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This bill is to compel the defendants to perform their agreement to purchase the house and lot 117 Arlington street, Newark. The defendants answer that the title is not marketable.

The complainant Austin (Hunt) Davis acquired title by will of his adoptive father, John Davis. The co-complainant is his wife. By the will the testator devised to his two sons, William and James, each a lot, and to his adopted son Austin another lot, and the remainder of his estate to his wife during widowhood. At her death he devised the homestead to his grandson, John W. Davis, the property here involved to his…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Patterson v. MaddenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1896
  2. Hampton v. NewkirkNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1921
  3. Platt v. JohnsonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1917
  4. Ambruster v. the "Own Your Home" Asso.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1925
  5. Rogers v. BailyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1909

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brown v. RobbinsNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1948
  2. Rector v. EyreNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1964
  3. Teasdale v. HarrisonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API