Laning v. Cole
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Bill for the specific performance of a contract, in the terms following:— “ Agreement between Isaac Cole, of tbe city of Camden, and •state of New-Jersey, and Samuel Laning, of the said city and state, dated this twenty-eighth day of November, eighteen hundred and thirty-nine, witnesseth as follows, to wit: “ 1. The said Isaac Cole agrees that the said Samuel Laning shall have six months from the twenty-sixth day of October last, to raise the amount of the purchase money…
Read the full summary
Bill for the specific performance of a contract, in the terms following:— “ Agreement between Isaac Cole, of tbe city of Camden, and •state of New-Jersey, and Samuel Laning, of the said city and state, dated this twenty-eighth day of November, eighteen hundred and thirty-nine, witnesseth as follows, to wit: “ 1. The said Isaac Cole agrees that the said Samuel Laning shall have six months from the twenty-sixth day of October last, to raise the amount of the purchase money which the said Isaac Cole paid for the property called Laning’s Row, and the costs and expenses incident to such purchase,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The property involved in this suit, consists of a lot of land in Camden, upon which there are six small-houses. The complainant was formerly the owner of the lot,, and built the houses to let, but becoming embarrassed, they were 6old by the sheriff of Gloucester to the defendant, on the twenty-sixth of October, eighteen hundred and thirty-nine, on executions at law, (subject to incumbrances,) for three thousand and sixty dollars. "Whether any valid objection existed to this sale- or not, is not now to be settled, but the complainant felt himself aggrieved by it, and being in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Platt v. JohnsonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1917