Legal Opinion

Blum Building Co. v. Ingersoll

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided August 4, 1926PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The bill, as supplemented, is by the vendee against the vendors to compel them to convey a parcel of land in South Orange as they had contracted to do.

In the preface to the contract, dated March 10th, 1924, it is recited that the complainant was willing to buy if it could obtain a permit from the village of South Orange to erect on the land a four-story apartment-house, and that the defendants were willing to enter into a contract of sale and to give to the complainants until May 1st, 1924, to obtain the permit, and that the complainant was willing to enter into such a "conditional…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Terry v. . MungerNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  2. Conrow v. . LittleNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  3. Connihan v. ThompsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
  4. Moller v. . TuskaNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
  5. Thompson v. HowardMichigan Supreme Court · 1875

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Ray v. Beneficial Fin. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1966
  2. Silverstein v. Abco Vending ServiceNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1955
  3. Levy v. Massachusetts Accident Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1938
  4. Lizak v. RottenbucherNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1947
  5. Knight v. Electric Household Utilities Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1943

5 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