Case ID: nj-eq_77/html/0598-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cassie L. Johnson, complainant, respondent, v. Ernestina F. Argueso et al., defendants, appellants.
    [Submitted July 11th, 1910.
    Decided November 14th, 1910.]
    On appeal- from a decree of foreclosure advised by Vice-Chancellor Garrison.
    . Mr. Arthur II. Bissell, for the defendants, appellants.
    
      Mr. Charles R. Snyder, for the complainant, respondent.
    
      
      Mr. Arthur II. Bissell and Mr. Edward J. Shumway (of flic New York bar), on the brief, for the appellants.
    
      Mr. Charles B. Snyder, for the respondent.
   Pee Curiam.

The single ground of appeal, set out in the appellants’ petition, is that the decree is erroneous, in that it “directs that an execution issue to the sheriff of the county of Monmouth to make sale of the mortgaged premises to raise and pay to the complainant the sum of $2,000, with interest” and costs. No attack is made by the petition upon that part of the decree which adjudicates the respective rights and obligations of the parties under the mortgage. Only errors alleged in the petition of appeal are before this court for consideration. Consequently, most' of the matters discussed by counsel in their briefs cannot be decided by us. We find no error in that part of the decree which is attacked by the appellant’s petition, and concur in the opinion of the learned vice-chancellor so far as it deals therewith.

•The decree under review will be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Ciiiee-Justice, Garrison, Swayzk, Trenctiard, Parker, Bergen, Voori-iees, Minturn, Bogert,. Veedenburgi-i, Vroom, Dill, Congdon — 13.

For reversal — None.