Perth Amboy evening news. [volume] (Perth Amboy, N.J.) 1903-1959, 1923-06-27
B. J. DUNCAN
ORDER DENIED
Vice Chancellor Buchanan Is
sues Decree in Long Con-
tested Woodbridge Case
FIGHT OVER A FARM
Property Held by Heirs of Late
T. F. Dunigan Not to be
Re-conveyed

IRE4N LIN, June o. V ACe O1ldn-
cellor Buchanan yesterday filed a
decree denying the application of
B. Joseph Dunigan for an order to
compel Mrs. Jane NJ. DUNCAN,
widow and other heirs of the late
Thomas f. Dunigan to re-convey
to him a forty acre farm in Wood
bridge Township, Middlesex county.
The property was owned originally
by Bernard Dunigan, deceased
parent of both Joseph and the late
Thomas F. DUNCAN and the latter
was given deed for it in 1898
which he held until the time of his
death and which his widow now re-
tains. For twenty-three years Jo-
seph operated the farm.
The vice chancellor said the pro-
ceedings had been brought on sew
eral theories. One of these was that
the equitable title to he property
was vested in Bernard DUNCAN
and when he died it descended to
his children as heirs at law. The
other ground for the application
was based upon the contention that
Thomas F. Dunigan's title obtain
ed in 1898 rested upon the equitable
trust or either an expressed or oral
contract made by Thomas with his
father, Bernard DUNCAN to the
effect that the former would con-
vey the land back to his parent.
Mr.. Buchanan said that he was
entirely satisfied on all the evil
dence presented, that there was no
such a contract made. Secondly, II
there had been, it was nullihed and
estopped by circumstances which
subsequently arose. Thirdly there
was no ground to the complainant
suit under the statute of fraud and
finally that there was no reason
presented for the failure of the
complainant and other heirs of Ber-
nard to try in the years gone by
to obtain the re-conveyance which
they sought at this time.
B. Joseph Duniganu failed to es-
tablish his contention that there
was an express contract to re-convey
the land, said the decree, and
ever existed the proof clearly show
whether or not any such thlng
ed that it was superseded by what
took place after Thomas obtained
the deed in 1885,, This reference
had to do with his paying off heavy
obligations on the property In the
form of judgments totaling in the
neighborhood of $4,000 with money
received from the Reading railroad
when it bought strip OF the lana
through the farm for transporta-
tion uses.
The situation respecting the OBJ
legations against the property which
Thomas discovered and the steps
which he took to change this con-
dition would make it inequitable for
the late Bernard Dunnigan, II ne
were in court yesterday to ask that
Thomas be compelled to obey the
terms of the contract originally
claimed to have been made when he
received the deed, declared the vice
chancellor.
The court further said that 1t was
quite possible that Thomas showed
Intentions during his life to convey
some part of the farm back to his
mother, Mrs. Bernard Dunnigan and
that if was perfectly possible for him
to have given her a portion of the
profit he made on the sale of some
of the land to the railroad. But, the
vice chancellor declared, there was
no proof that these acts were other
than voluntary. 1t had been testl-
fed that the late Thomas give his
mother the sum of $4,000 left out
of the railroad money.
Thomas was given the deed for the
farm in 1898 and held it until 1904
or until the death of he father and
during that time there was no at
tempt made by the late Bernard
Dunnigan to get it back and no rea-
son given for this failure. Then all
the way down until 1921 Thomas
continued to hold the deed to the
farm and no effort was made to
compel performance of the contract
claimed to exist or to force a re-
conveyance. the Vice Chancellor
pointed out, twenty-three years in
all elapsed from the time of the
making of the alleged promise to
the return of the property.
To this viewpoint B. Joseph Dun
nigan set up the answer that he oc-
cupied the farm all these years, said
the court but there was no excuse
for failure to attempt to carry out
the alleged contract.
Edmund J. Hayes appeared for
Mrs. Jane Dunnigan and Ephrian
Cutter was counsel for B. Joseph
Dunnigan. having as associate Cliff
ford 1. VOORHEES,. Vice Chancellor
Buchanan allowed Mr.. Hayes coun-
sci fee of $500, which must be paid
by the complainant.
Gardener Wanted. Apply Frank Van
Syckle. Cliff Road, Sewaren.
96042-6-27-2ts