Lask v. Bedell, Inc.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Lane, who filed the following opinion: The facts, as I find them, are as follows: On March 1st, 1918, complainant loaned one Corcoran $2,000 for the purpose of enabling Corcoran to acquire an interest in the stock of Bedell, Inc., a corporation; the loan was evidenced by a note dated March 1st, 1918, m'ade’by Corcoran to- Lask, which note is unpaid.
Read the full summary
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Lane, who filed the following opinion: The facts, as I find them, are as follows: On March 1st, 1918, complainant loaned one Corcoran $2,000 for the purpose of enabling Corcoran to acquire an interest in the stock of Bedell, Inc., a corporation; the loan was evidenced by a note dated March 1st, 1918, m'ade’by Corcoran to- Lask, which note is unpaid. Corcoran, at the time of the advance, assigned to complainant, as collateral security for the payment of the note, “fifty per cent, of my (holdings) stock, preferred and…
1Per curiam
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Lane.
For affirmance — Tss Chibe-Justice, Teenchaeb, Parker, JBergejST, Mihturn, Kalisoh, Black, White, HeppbhSeimer, Williams, Taylor, Aokersoh — 12.
For reversal — None.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Leighton v. NEW YORK, SUSQUEHANNA & WESTERN RAILROAD CO.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
- Warren v. New Jersey Zinc Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
- Harld Holding Co. v. LairdNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1927
- Estate of Fortunato v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2010