Legal Opinion

Naugle v. Baumann

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided June 5, 1924PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The original bill in this case was filed by Naugle, as vendee of lands under a contract of sale from Herbert McVoy, against McVoy and his wife, for specific performance of the contract. McVoy was not the owner of the lands when the contract was made, but was himself the vendee under a contract from the owner, Karl Baumann. McVoy, subsequent to his contract with Naugle, assigned his contract from Baumann, to his wife, Mary McVoy. Baumann refused to complete his contract by conveyance, and instead conveyed to his wife (defendant Bertha Baumann), who in turn conveyed to Elihu H. Cooley, taking…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Semenowich v. MelnykNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1921

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Investment B. L. Assn. v. PreisendanzNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1936
  2. Baumann v. NaugleNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API