Braverman v. Braverman

37 A.2d 57, 135 N.J. Eq. 43, 1944 N.J. LEXIS 384

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided April 20, 1944·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The action of the Vice-Chancellor in retaining the bill until final hearing is a matter that was well within his discretion and is approved.

The order under review is affirmed.

For affirmance — -The Chief-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodixe, Doxges, Het-ter, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Ti-iompsox, Dill. JJ. 14.

For reversal — -Perskie, J. 1.

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

Per Curiam.

The action of the Vice-Chancellor in retaining the bill until final hearing is a matter that was well within his discretion and is approved.

The order under review is affirmed.

For affirmance — -The Chief-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodixe, Doxges, Het-ter, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Ti-iompsox, Dill. JJ. 14.

For reversal — -Perskie, J. 1.

Braverman v. Braverman, 37 A.2d 57, 135 N.J. Eq. 43, 1944 N.J. LEXIS 384 (N.J. 1944).

Pincite

37 A.2d 57 (Braverman v. Braverman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.