Bank of Montclair v. Mallas
Bank of Montclair, Complainant-Appellant v. William Mallas, Defendant-Respondent.
Opinion of the Court
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 Ciiiee-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Hei-ier, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Rafeerty, Cole, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.