« AnteriorContinuar »
BOYCOTTS AND STRIKES—Continued.
prevent persons, not as yet employed but willing to take em-
ployment under the complainant, from entering such employ-
4. An injunction sustained against “picketing" designed to
molest and annoy persons employed or willing to be employed
by complainant. Id...
An injunction against a "boycott" sustained. Id.......
The “Act relative to persons combining and encouraging
other persons to combine" (P. L. 1883 p. 36; Gen. Stat. p.
2314 pl. 23), does not legitimize an invasion of private rights
nor prevent the party injured from having full redress. Id..... 219
BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS-1. A borrowing mem-
ber of a building and loan association who executes a mortgage
and pledges his shares to the association as security for the
money borrowed is not entitled to credit on his mortgage debt
for the premiums paid by him. although no affirmative action
had been taken by the association in the exercise of its option
to declare the entire mortgage debt due by reason of a default
of such member in the payment of interest on the mortgage pur-
suant to a stipulation therein in that behalf contained, prior to
the suspension of business of such association and the appoint-
ment of a receiver. French V. JOHNSON..
Such borrowing member is not entitled to stand on the
footing of a non-defaulting mortgagor who has lost his rights
to the benefits of the consummation of the building association
scheme solely by reason of the association's insolvency. Id..... 146
3. A delinquent borrower against whom a default has been
declared, and one similarly delinquent against whom no default
has been declared, occupy much the same position so far as their
rights are concerned. Id..
CANCELLATION–1. In a suit by a grantor to set aside a deed
reserving a life estate, evidence held not to show that the
grantee, taking also a lease of the premises, was to support the
grantor and pay the interest on the mortgage on the premises if
the lease was terminated by the grantor, and the failure to insert
such an agreement in the deed or to make a breach thereof a
matter of defeasance did not justify a cancellation of the deed.
TYGAR v. Cook...
of the objects of leasing to the grantee was to secure to the
grantor support for life as a member of the grantee's family,
and the right of the grantor to a renewal of the lease with the
covenant of support from year to year for her life and at her
sole option was an essential part of the agreement, which should
have been inserted in the deed, and, under the agreeinent as
inserted in the deed, the grantee could abandon the lease at the
end of the year.-Held, that the failure to insert the agreement
in the deed was a fatal defect, entitling the grantor to its can-
3. The court on canceling a deed of land at the suit of the
grantor will relieve the grantee from liability on mortgages exe-
cuted after the execution of the deed pursuant to an agreement
between the parties, and will impose other equitable terms. Id., 300
Bioren v. Nesler, 76 N. J. Eq. 573.
Brindse v. Atlantic City, &c., Assn., 74 N. J. Eq. 589.
Collins v. Leary. 74 N. J. Eg. 852.
Crane v. McMurtrie, 68 Atl. Rep. 92.
De Vita v. Loprete, 75 V. J. Eq. 421.
Faulkner v. Wassmer.
Freeman v. Island Heights H. and I. Co., 75 N. J. Eq. 491.
Gardner v. Kleinke, 46 N. J. Eq. 90.
Gen. Elec: Co. v. Transit, &c., Co., 57 N. J. Eq. 460.
Groff v. er, 75 N. J. Eq. 4.)).
Hlaston v. Castner, 31 N. J. Eq. 607.
Home &c., v. Traders', &c., (o.
Howell r. Steelman 76 N. J. Eq. 423.
Ilowey v. Howey.
Island Heights H. aud I. Co. v. Freeman.
Johnson 1. Argueso.
Johnston 1. McKenna, 76 N. J. Eg. 217.
Jonas Glass Co. v. Glass, &c., Ass'n, 72 N. J. Eq. 653.
Kelsey r. Dilks, 74 N. J. Eq. 270.
Kohn v. Kelly, 70 X, J. Eq. 132.
Landrum r. Knowles, 22 V. J. Eq. 594.
Larkin 1". Wikoff, 75 X. J. Eq. 462.
Lee v. Lee.
Mason r. Ross, 75 X. J. Eq. 136.
Myles v. Myles.
McMaster 1. Drew.
Nat. Fire, &c., Co. v. Daly, 76 X. J. Eq. 35.
Paterson 1'. East Jersey Co., 74 Y. J. Eq. 49.
Pfefferle 1. Herr, 75 X. J. Eq. 219.
Prudential Ins. ('o. of America r. Godfrey, 75 X. J. Eq. 484.
Schlicher v. Trenton, &r.. ('o.
South Amboy r. Pennsylvania Railroad ('o.. 76 X. J. Eq. 57.
Speeler 1. Heil.
Spring Lake v. Polak 76 N. J. Eg. 212.
Stevenson v. Stambach.
Sullivan v. Maroney, 70 N. J. Eq. 104.
Van Horn 1. Demarest. 76 N. J. Eq. 386.
Van Riper v. Wickersham.
Washington Nat. Bank 1. Beatty, 70 N. J. Eq. 433.
West End, &c., Co. 1. Wetherill.
Wood v. Wood.
CEMETERY ASSOCIATIONS–1. 1 Gen. Stat. 1895 p. 349 au-
thorized incorporation of rural cemetery associations to hold
one hundred and thirty-five acres of land, and cast the manage-
ment thereof on trustees elected by the lot owners, and exempted
the land from taxation, and provided that the lots from time of
interment should be inalienable, and allowed the holding of
property in trust to apply income to improvements, and the
investment of money accruing from sale of lots for the purpose
of improvement of the land, and also provided that at least one-
half the proceeds of all sales of lots should be first appropriated
to the payment of the purchase-money of the land acquired, until
the whole purchase-money should be paid, and the residue used
to improve the grounds, and after the land is paid for future
earnings from the sale of lots shall go to the improvement and
preservation of the cemetery. By supplement of March 14th,
1879 (1 Gen. Stat. p. 351 16), it is provided that any creditor,
in addition to his right to vote by virtue of owning lots, shall
be entitled to one vote for every $100 worth at par value of
bonds, "stock," or other duly authorized evidence of debt he
may hold against such association. A cemetery association
under the act bought land jointly with another association, each
taking the limit of land allowed. and gave to the purchaser
certificates of shares in the proceeds of the sale of the lots as
consideration.-Held, that the statute did not permit the giving
of stock which at all times would be a lien on the proceeds,
even after the lots were paid for; and hence the certificate
issued by the association conferred no legal right, since it did
not oblige the company to pay a definite price for the land, and
disregarded the provisions obliging the company to appropriate
one-half of the proceeds to the improvement of the property.
East RIDGELAWN CEMETERY CO. 1. FRANK..
2. Held, also, that though the word "stock" was used in the
supplement. it would be considered an inadvertence, and not
sufficient to change the scheme of the statute. Id.......
3. Neither would the scheme of the statute permit two com-
panies, each holding the limit of land. jointly to buy land, and
jointly to give certificates for shares for the purchase price. Id., 36
4. In a suit for specific performance of a contract to convey
land, purchased by a cemetery association, and paid for by the
issuance of certificates of stock, the association cannot urge that
it is entitled to relief, without passing on the question of the
validity of the certificate, when the bill on its face shows that
the certificate was issued in disregard of the scheme of Gen.
Stat. p. 349, under which it was organized, and was the only
consideration for the purchase. Id.....
CERTIFICATES. SCRIP-Sce NEGOTIABILITY OF INSTRUMENTS,
CHATTEL MORTGAGES-1. Proof of the execution of a chattel
mortgage before a notary public is not a compliance with the
provisions of the general act concerning chattel mortgages, re.
quiring them to be proved as prescribed by the act respecting
conveyances. P. L. 1902 p. 487 $$ 4-6. PARTRIDGE 1. ME-
CHANICS NATIONAL BANK OF BURLINGTON.
2. --- The circumstance that the notary public was also a com-
missioner of deeds and an attorney-at-law does not validate such
a chattel mortgage, it appearing that the person taking the proof
did not act in either of those capacities, but assumed to do so in
his capacity of notary. Id......
3. • The contention that because the proof of a corporate deed
may be made by an affidavit, and that under the general act
respecting oaths and affidavits (P. L. 1900 p. 320) they may be
taken before a notary and heard. such a mode of proving the
execution of a chattel mortgage examined and declared to be
non-sustainable. Gen. El. Co. v. Transit Equipment Co., 57 N.
J. Eq. (12 Dick.) 460, distinguished. Id.......
4. Where, before giving a second chattel mortgage, the mort-
gagor paid the mortgagee's transferee $25 monthly, as previously
agreed, and the second mortgage given to the transferee pro-
vided for like payments, monthly payments of $50 were properly
applied equally to the two mortgages. COLLERD v. TULLY...... 439
5. · A chattel mortgage covering all the goods and chattels
mentioned in an annexed schedule "and now" in a certain stable,
the schedule specifying horses, &c., and providing that all horses,
&c.. bought by the mortgagor during the life of the mortgage
should become subject to the lien, covered after-acquired prop-
A chattel mortgage need not be in any particular form.
7. — A chattel mortgage description is sufficient if it designates
the property clearly enongh to enable one to determine what
property is meant, and this results if the language puts one on
inquiry in such way as to necessarily lead to knowledge of the
property intended to be mortgaged. Id...
8. A chattel mortgage will be construed to cover after-acquired
property if the court under the terms of the mortgage would
have decreed specific performance of a contract to sell or pledge
9. Property to which one may acquire title in the future can
be validly mortgaged. Id...