Schalk v. Kingsley
Supreme Court of New Jersey
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 to recover damages which he sustained by injury done to premises upon which he held a mortgage.
The alleged tort was the removal of fixtures from the mortgaged premises,' which were appropriated by one Eogers, a subsequent mortgagee. The defendant, Kingsley, who is an attorney-at-law, was employed by Eogers, as his attorney in this matter. While acting in that capacity, Kingsley, on behalf of Eogers, employed workmen to remove the fixtures, and paid them for their labor.
Two questions are presented by…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gooding v. SheaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Ford & Rockwood v. WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Byrom v. ChapinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Hardy v. KeelerIllinois Supreme Court · 1870
- Hunter v. Burtis & EllsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1833
3Cited by6 opinions
- LoBiondo v. SchwartzSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2009
- Jaffe-Spindler Co. v. Genesco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1984
- Ackerman v. LaganoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1979
- Wheeler v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
- Jaffe-Spindler Company and Benjamin D. Jaffe, as General Partner v. Genesco, Inc., and Monumental Life Insurance Company, and I.R.E. Realty Advisors, Inc., the General Partner of and D/B/A Investors Tax Sheltered Real Estate, Ltd., Series Ii, a Florida Limited Partnership, in Re Genesco, Inc. v. Monumental Life Insurance Co. And in Re Jaffe-Spindler Company v. Genesco, IncCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.