LAW.coLAW.co

THE CLINTON AMUSEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HARRY DRANOW AND ISADORE LEICHTER, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals1916-03-06
88 N.J.L. 701

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Supreme Court will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in its per curiam, except the statement that the facts showed that the defendants surrendered the premises. We think the facts showed that the premises were not surrendered but were abandoned, and that the plaintiffs thereupon resumed control of them. For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chile Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Parker, Minturn, Kalisch, White, Terhune, Heppenheimer, Williams, Taylor, JJ. 12.

For reversal—None.