Legal Opinion

Eiseman v. Schneider

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 15, 1897PublishedCited by 4 opinions

On rule to show cause.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Van Syckel, J.

This suit was brought by the plaintiff against the defendant, who is her son-in-law, to recover damages for the breach of an alleged oral agreement made twenty years ago, that in consideration of certain domestic services to be performed by her, he would support and maintain her during her lifetime.

There was sufficient evidence to establish the parol contract.

The defence was set up that the plaintiff, four or five years ago, abandoned the contract by going to Europe and remaining there some time, and that there was no renewal of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Gardenier v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Burney v. BallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1858
  3. Sword v. KeithMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  4. Houghton v. HoughtonIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
  5. McConahey v. GriffeySupreme Court of Iowa · 1891

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Kozlowski v. KozlowskiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1978
  2. Doyle v. Northrop Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1978
  3. Shiddell v. Electro Rust-Proofing Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
  4. Burgesser v. WendelSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API