LAW.coLAW.co

MARY SILAK, RESPONDENT, v. HUDSON AND MANHATTAN RAILROAD COMPANY, APPELLANT

New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals1935-10-09
115 N.J.L. 504

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Case in the Supreme Court. For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Yan Buskirk, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolesKell, Bafferty, JJ. 13. For reversal — None.