Bernheimer v. Verdon

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Bernheimer v. Verdon

49 A. 732, 63 N.J. Eq. 312, 18 Dickinson 312, 1901 N.J. LEXIS 184

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 19, 1901·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from by both sides in this ease is affirmed, for the reasons given in the court of chancery, except that the date of January 31st, 1900, stated by mistake in the decree, should be changed to January 31st, 1899.

For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Van Sycicel, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Collins, Fort, Garretson, Hendrickson, Bogert, Krueger, Adams, Vredenburgh, Voorhees, Vroom—15. For reversal—None.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from by both sides in this ease is affirmed, for the reasons given in the court of chancery, except that the date of January 31st, 1900, stated by mistake in the decree, should be changed to January 31st, 1899.

For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Van Sycicel, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Collins, Fort, Garretson, Hendrickson, Bogert, Krueger, Adams, Vredenburgh, Voorhees, Vroom—15. For reversal—None.

Bernheimer v. Verdon, 49 A. 732, 63 N.J. Eq. 312, 18 Dickinson 312, 1901 N.J. LEXIS 184 (N.J. 1901).

Pincite

49 A. 732 (Bernheimer v. Verdon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related