Bridgeport Brass Co. v. Feuser & Sullivan, Inc.

184 A. 523, 120 N.J. Eq. 200, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 687
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided April 24, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appeal is from an order denying an application for counsel fee in resisting an adjudication of insolvency, and from an order denying a claim for alleged services in collecting certain accounts receivable of .the defendant corporation.

A careful examination of the record satisfies us that the orders complained of were entered pursuant to the exercise of a sound discretion and they are, therefore, affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hei-ier, Perseie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, JJ. 12.

For reversal — Hone. .

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

Bridgeport Brass Co. v. Feuser & Sullivan, Inc., 184 A. 523, 120 N.J. Eq. 200, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 687 (N.J. 1936).

184 A. 523 (Bridgeport Brass Co. v. Feuser & Sullivan, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.