Case ID: nj-eq_121/html/0112-01.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

Helen Manz, complainant-respondent, v. Tenafly Trust Company, defendant-respondent; George Manz, executor, &c., defendant-appellant.
    [Argued May term, 1936.
    Decided October 2d, 1936.]
    
      Mr. Joseph F. Kearney and Mr. Vvncent M. Rotolo, for the defendant-appellant.
    
      Messrs. Gaudielle & Shuart, Mr. Edward Thomas Moore, Mr. Joseph H. Gaudielle and Mr. James A. Major, for the complainant-respondent.
    
      Messrs. Seufert & Elmore, for Tenafly Trust Company.
   Per Curiam.

The appeal is from a decree in the court of chancery holding that John Manz in his lifetime had made to the complainant a valid gift of the moneys on deposit to his credit in the defendant trust company. The proofs examined clearly support the findings of the court.

The decree is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heiier, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Woles-Kbil, Raeeerty, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.