Case ID: nj-eq_93/html/0228-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rena Peddie Crosley et al., appellants, v. The Superb Realty Company, respondent.
    [Decided September 30th, 1921.]
    On appeal from a decree of the court, of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Fielder, who rendered the following opinion orally:
    “I feel in this case, the burden of the proof being on the complainants in case of mistake alleged between the parties, the burden must be sustained by clear and convincing evidence. I feel that the complainant has not sustained that burden of proof in tliis case, and that there is not sufficient in the testimony to justify me in reforming the instrument as prayed for by the complainants and I will therefore dismiss the bill.”
    
      Mr. Frank Benjamin., for the appellants.
    
      Mr. SelicJc Mendes, for the respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Fielder.

For ajjb'mmce — Ti-ie Chief-Justice, Swayze, Trenckard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kaltsci-i, Black, Katzenbaci-i, Williams, Gardner, Aokerson, Van Buskirk — 13.

For reversal — None.