LAW.coLAW.co

E. LEONARD FRYLING AND HARRY F. FRYLING, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. HOWARD RUSS AND WARREN K. RUSS, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

New Jersey Supreme Court1934-05-24
113 N.J.L. 160

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

From an examination of the record in this case it is apparent that there were fact questions presented which were sub mitted by the trial judge to the jury in a charge that was faultless so far as any question is presented for our determination. The judgment is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Ciiiee Justice, Teen-chard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Van Buskirk, Dear, JJ. 12.

For reversal — Hone.