Legal Opinion
Buckingham v. Ludlum
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Decided May 15, 1883PublishedCited by 3 opinions
On hearing on petition of Joseph W. McElfoy and answer of receiver and proofs taken in open court.
1Opinion of the Court
Van Fleet, V. C.
The questions now before the court for decision arise on a petition presented, in this suit, by Joseph W. McElroy, praying that an order may be made, directing the receiver appointed m this cause to pay to him the sum remaining due on a judgment recovered by him against James Ludlum, as surviving member of the firm of James Horner & Co. For many years prior to the 9th of June, 1874, James Horner and James Ludlum were engaged, as copartners, in the manufacture of steel, at Pompton, in the county of Passaic, under the name of James Horner & Co. On the date last named the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kane v. BloodgoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1823
- Lawrence v. Trustees of Leake & Watts Orphan HouseNew York Supreme Court · 1845
- Robinson v. HookU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1826
- Smith v. BallantyneNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brown v. Fidelity Union Trust Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1939
- Matter of Elsub Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · 1986
- Di Bologna v. EarlNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1942