LAW.coLAW.co

WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN ET AL., RESPONDENTS; WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN, CENTRAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ET AL., RESPONDENTS

New Jersey Supreme Court1931-04-24
108 N.J.L. 208

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgments under review will be affirmed for the reasons given in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bodine in the Supreme Court, ubi supra.

We note that the language of the resolution of the board of freeholders is slightly misquoted. Instead of the word ‘%ts for said new development,” the resolution should read “lands for said new road.” The difference is unimportant, but the correction is made in the interest of verbal accuracy. No. 156—

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Daly, Van Buskirk, Kays, Dear, Wells, JJ. 10.

For reversal — None.

No. 157—

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Lloyd, Case, Daly, Van Buskirk, Kays, Dear, Wells, JJ. 9.

For reversal — None.