Bowen v. Schackter

65 A. 1117, 73 N.J.L. 818, 44 Vroom 818, 1907 N.J. LEXIS 142
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedJanuary 2, 1907
StatusPublished

This text of 65 A. 1117 (Bowen v. Schackter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bowen v. Schackter, 65 A. 1117, 73 N.J.L. 818, 44 Vroom 818, 1907 N.J. LEXIS 142 (N.J. 1907).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

For the reasons given in the opinion of Mr. Justice Swayze, in the Supreme Court, reported in 43 Vroom 441, the judgment brought up by this writ of error is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Fort, Garrets on, Hendrickson, Pitney, Reed, Trench akd, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Vroom, Green, Gray, Dill. 14. For reversal — None.

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

Related

Bowen v. Shackter
60 A. 1111 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 A. 1117, 73 N.J.L. 818, 44 Vroom 818, 1907 N.J. LEXIS 142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowen-v-schackter-nj-1907.