Legal Opinion

McKinstry v. Runk

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 15, 1858PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

The complainants show but very little ground for the favorable consideration of a court of equity.

They owed the money due on the judgment. This is not disputed. The plaintiffs in that judgment, Runk and Ten Eyck, were the proper persons for them to settle with. The negotiation, or arrangement with Fisher, was a mere matter of speculation on their part; and taking into consideration the age of old Mr. Todd, and the position Fisher occupied towards him, it was not right or creditable in the complainants to buy up a lawsuit with the defendants. Although there is no direct evidence…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Emerson Ny-Nj, Inc. v. Brookwood TvNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1973
  2. Finocchiaro v. D'AMICONew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
  3. In Re: Phelps v. Copley Dev. CorpNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API