LAW.coLAW.co

JOHN L. HARING, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals1891-06
53 N.J.L. 664

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree with the opinion of the Supreme Court except so far as it construes the act of March 30th, 1887. It is unnecessary to pass upon that part of the opinion, because we find the act to be unconstitutional. Let the judgment below be affirmed.

.For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Mague, Reed, Scudder, Brown, Clement, Smith, Whitaker. 9.

For reversal—None.