C. Edward Myers Co. v. Town of Boonton

Supreme Court of New Jersey

C. Edward Myers Co. v. Town of Boonton

126 A. 924, 100 N.J.L. 406, 1924 N.J. LEXIS 260

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided October 20, 1924·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Neither after consideration of the facts, nor of the law involved in this case, are we disposed to disturb the judgment appealed from; for, as was sagely remarked by Lord Coke, "ubi eadem ratio ibi idem jus.” Co. Litt. 10a; Ippollilo v. Ridgefield, 94 N. J. L. 97; Headley v. Cavelier, 82 N. J. L. 637; Jersey City Supply Co. v. Jersey City 71 Id. 631; Ocean Gily v. Shriver, 64 Id. 550.

The judgment will therefore be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, Clark, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 16

For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

Neither after consideration of the facts, nor of the law involved in this case, are we disposed to disturb the judgment appealed from; for, as was sagely remarked by Lord Coke, "ubi eadem ratio ibi idem jus.” Co. Litt. 10a; Ippollilo v. Ridgefield, 94 N. J. L. 97; Headley v. Cavelier, 82 N. J. L. 637; Jersey City Supply Co. v. Jersey City 71 Id. 631; Ocean Gily v. Shriver, 64 Id. 550.

The judgment will therefore be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, Clark, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 16

For reversal — None.

C. Edward Myers Co. v. Town of Boonton, 126 A. 924, 100 N.J.L. 406, 1924 N.J. LEXIS 260 (N.J. 1924).

Pincite

126 A. 924 (C. Edward Myers Co. v. Town of Boonton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.