Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

BANK OF MONTCLAIR, complainant-appellant, v. WILLIAM MALLAS,defendant-respondent.

1. The omission of cestuis que trust from the foreclosure in this case constituted a cloud on the title of the realty to be sold.

2. Equity will not compel a purchaser to take a doubtful title.

PER CURIAM.

We concur in the view expressed in the court below, that the omission of the cestuis que trust from the foreclosure constituted a cloud on the title of the realty contracted to be sold, and that such cloud was not removed by the orphans court proceeding.

The rule that equity will not compel a purchaser to take a doubtful title, laid down in the chancery cases cited in the court below, has also the sanction of this court. Tillotson v. Gesner, 33 N.J. Eq. 313; Van Riper v. Wickersham, 77 N.J. Eq. 232; Doutney v. Lambie, 78 N.J. Eq. 277; Security Bond and Mortgage Co. v. Weiss, 101 N.J. Eq. 307; affirming 100 N.J. Eq. 156; Rosenson v. Bochenek, 102 N.J. Eq. 543.

The decree under review will be affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, PERSKIE, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, COLE, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BANK OF MONTCLAIR v. MALLAS
(Jan 27, 1937)