LAW.coLAW.co

Richard Siegman, appellant, v. George H. Day et al., respondents

New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals1903-03-11
65 N.J. Eq. 374

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

The facts set out in the bill of complaint in this cause are, in their legal effect, identical with those exhibited in the bill in the ease of Siegman v. Maloney, decided at the present term of this court. For the reasons stated in the opinion filed in that case, the decree brought up ,by this appeal should be affirmed. For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Van Syckel, Dixon, Garrison, Fort, Garretson, Hendrickson, Yredenburgi-i, Yoorhees, Yroom — 10.

For reversal — None.