South Camden Trust Co. v. Stiefel
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
Complainant has moved to strike out defendant's counter-claim as "sham and untrue."
By the 1915 supplement to our Chancery act (P.L. 1915 p. 185 § 4) legislative sanction is given to striking out, on notice, "any frivolous or sham defense." But no legislation or rule of court specifically contemplates a motion of that nature against either a bill or counter-claim. By the same act (P.L. 1915 p.195 §§ 54, 55) cross-bills are abolished, and any matter theretofore the proper subject of a cross-bill is authorized to be set up by a counter-claim, and a counter-claim is there defined as a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Weidmann Silk Dyeing Co. v. East Jersey Water Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1918
- Baum's Castorine Co. v. ThomasNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Moore v. MooreNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1908
- Stanbery v. BakerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1897
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lettieri v. MistrettaNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1927
- Engler v. BuesserSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
- Rapps v. TulenkoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
- Scarano v. ScaranoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1942
- Turnbull v. Eight Creditors Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.