C. Edward Myers Co. v. Town of Boonton
This text of 126 A. 924 (C. Edward Myers Co. v. Town of Boonton) 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.
Opinion
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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
126 A. 924, 100 N.J.L. 406, 1924 N.J. LEXIS 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-edward-myers-co-v-town-of-boonton-nj-1924.