Stillman Hoag, Inc. v. Peeck
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
Defendants bring this motion to vacate a decree pro confesso and permitting them to file an answer in this suit for specific performance. Testimony was taken on the application. I do not consider that defendants have made out a case entitling them to the relief asked for.
Hackensack Trust Company foreclosed a mortgage on the real estate in question against defendants Peeck and Luedemann on a bond of $4,000. The premises were sold by the sheriff under decree and bid in by the mortgagor. A motion to confirm the sale was before the court. The motion to confirm was contested and was to come before…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kamens v. AndersonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Lean v. LeedsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1921
- Avidan v. KaplanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1930
- Rapps v. TulenkoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
3Cited by1 opinion
- Al-Sco Realty Co., Inc. v. Suburban Apt. Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1946