New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, 1942

Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co.

Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Decided January 9, 1942 · PER CURIAM.
23 A.2d 564; 130 N.J. Eq. 600; 1942 N.J. LEXIS 561 (Atlantic Reporter, Second Series)

Murphy v. Westfield Trust Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed for the reasons expressed by Vice-Chancellor Stein, reported in 129 N. J. Eq. 389, in so far as the same lead to the view that the contract sued upon did not comprehend the omission in Keller’s *601 will to make final distribution of the two-fourths part of the corpus remaining over after the life estates of Josephine De Eonge and Annie Townsend Ashmore. Supporting citations on the proposition that in the distribution of personalty under R. S. 3:26-6 and R. S. 3:5-6 et seq., the half blood and the whole blood are on an equal footing are: In re Peake, 115 N. J. Eq. 233; affirmed, 116 N. J. Eq. 565; Smith v. McDonald, 71 N. J. Eq. 261; In re Tantum, 97 N. J. Eq. 271; In re Bell, 99 N. J. Eq. 835. For a review of the earlier authorities see In re Zeek, 40 N. J. L. J. 297.

We reserve opinion on the defense of laches.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hei-ier, Perskie, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Eafeerty, Hague, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.