Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bramall v. Walton

Decided: November 11, 1952.

LEWIS E. BRAMALL AND FRANK J. BRAMALL, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
MARGARET S. WALTON AND M. LYNWOOD WALTON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF JOHN C. STUART, DECEASED; JOHN STUART WALTON, A MINOR; HANNAH S. CREAMER AND FRANK T. SCHWARTZ, INC., A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANTS



Haneman, J.s.c.

Haneman

Defendants herein move for a summary judgment on the ground that there exists no genuine issue as to any material fact, and that they are entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.

The complaint discloses the following:

1. On May 5, 1950 John C. Stuart executed the following memorandum of an alleged agreement with the plaintiffs:

"FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY,

Beverly, New Jersey

5-5-50

Received from F.J. and L.E. Bramel $200 -- on acct. 200 ft of Land fronting on Cooper St. from point in Land of Andrew Wright to point south 200 ft at $14 -- per foot frontage.

John C. Stuart"

2. On September 16, 1951 said John C. Stuart died without having conveyed the lands to the plaintiffs and letters testamentary were granted to Margaret S. Walton and M. Lynwood Walton, the executors nominated in his last will and testament.

3. On December 7, 1951 plaintiffs recorded said contract in the office of the Clerk of Burlington County and thereupon made demand upon said executors to comply with the terms thereof.

4. On May 19, 1952 the individually named defendants conveyed the real estate here involved to the defendant Frank T. Schwartz, Inc., for a consideration of $3,500. Action was thereupon commenced in this court on August 8, 1952.

Defendants move for a summary judgment, alleging that the facts as disclosed in the complaint demonstrate that the plaintiffs did not comply with any of the requirements of R.S. 46:21-3 concerning the commencement of an action for the specific performance of a recorded agreement to sell real estate. The cited statute reads as follows:

"Every hereafter recorded agreement for the sale or purchase of real estate situate in this state shall be absolutely void as against subsequent judgment creditors of the vendor and as against subsequent purchasers and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.