Bartletta v. McFeeley
166 A. 144, 113 N.J. Eq. 67, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 982
Opinion
The decree under review is affirmed, for the reasons given in the opinion of Vice-Chancellor Bigelow.
For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Van Buskirk, Kays, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Dill, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bartletta v. McFeeley, 166 A. 144, 113 N.J. Eq. 67, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 982 (N.J. 1933).
166 A. 144 (Bartletta v. McFeeley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
McGovern v. Van Riper
54 A.2d 469 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1947)
County of Aitkin v. City of Minneapolis
211 Minn. 223 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1941)
In Re Settlement of Robinette
300 N.W. 798 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1941)