Legal Opinion

Hirschberg v. Flusser

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided June 21, 1917PublishedCited by 12 opinions

On motion to strike out.

1Opinion of the Court

•Lane, Y. C.

This is a motion to strike out a bill. The bill allegés that ’complainant is the owner of certain property; that defendant, who is the "owner of adjoining property, on or about May 3d, 1911, intending to build an addition to his building, excavated to a depth of twenty-four feet, and in so doing excavated a portion of complainant’s property substantially twenty-six feet five inches by nine inches; that defendant then proceeded to build on his own land and also on the land of complainant his foundation and side wall up to the lpvel of the ground, but that above the.level of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Baron v. . KornNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Herr v. BierbowerHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1851
  3. Haitsch v. DuffyCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1914

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Procaccino v. E. Horton & SonsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  2. Dundalk Holding Co. v. EasterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
  3. Lidgerwood Estates v. Public Service, C., Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
  4. McCullough v. HartpenceNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1948
  5. Union Trust Co. v. Goerke Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928

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

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

Powered by the Exa API