LAW.coLAW.co

EMANUEL DREYFUS, RESPONDENT, v. LUTZ COMPANY, APPELLANT

New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals1929-05-20
106 N.J.L. 566

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 the Supreme Court. For affirmance — Ti-ie Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Paekee, Black, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Yah Buskiek, McGlennon, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, JJ. 12. For reversal — None.