Legal Opinion

Garnsey v. Mundy

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided October 15, 1873PublishedCited by 3 opinions

On final hearing, upon pleadings and proofs.

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

On the 4th of February, 1861, the complainant, Sarah M. Garnsey, who was then a single woman, (her maiden name being Sarah M. Mundy,) and of the age of about twenty-one years, was seized in her own right in fee, in possession, through inheritance from her father, James Mundy, deceased, of a parcel of unimproved farming land, of about seven acres, in Middlesex county, in this state, and was also the owner of an undivided third of the remainder, in fee, of two other lots there — one a wood lot of about two acres, and the other the house lot, containing about nine and a half…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Nat. Newark Essex Banking Co. v. RosahlNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1925
  2. Hamilton Trust Co. of Paterson v. BamfordNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
  3. Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. ParfnerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API