Legal Opinion

Tynan v. Warren

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided February 15, 1895PublishedCited by 3 opinions

•On bill, answer, replication and proofs.

1Opinion of the Court

Green, V. C.

This bill is to establish a trust.

The complainant Tynan and defendant Warren were sureties on ,an administrator’s bond, dated February 8th, 1876, in the penalty of $16,000, filed in the Passaic county surrogate’s office.

*314On a rumor that the administrators were mismanaging the-estate, one o-f them, on May 6th, 1876, assigned to Tynan and Warren as indemnity in respect of their liability, all his interest: in a mortgage of $7,000, on property in Paterson, which - mortgage, at the time of such assignment, was held by the PassaicCounty Savings Bank as collateral for a note for $5,000,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Oliver v. PiattSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
  2. Flagg v. MannU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1837
  3. Smith v. BurnhamU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1838
  4. American Surety Co. v. ConwaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1917
  5. Whiting v. GouldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Crandol v. GarrisonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
  2. Bruen v. TeppermanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
  3. Staub v. Lafayette Piece Dye Works, Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API