Caruso v. Town of Montclair
100 A. 340, 90 N.J.L. 312, 5 Gummere 312, 1917 N.J. LEXIS 316
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Caruso v. Town of Montclair. Read the opinion of the Court — 90 N.J.L. 255 →
Opinion
The same question presented in this ease was involved in Nicola Caruso and Guiseppi Caruso, appellants, v. Town of Montclair, decided at the present term (ante p. 255), and for the reasons given in the opinion filed in that case, the judgment herein will bo affirmed, with costs.
For affirmance—Tile Chancellor, Cihee Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trench ard, Parker, Bergen, MInturn, Kallsch, Black, White, Williams, Gardner, JJ. 13.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Caruso v. Town of Montclair, 100 A. 340, 90 N.J.L. 312, 5 Gummere 312, 1917 N.J. LEXIS 316 (N.J. 1917).
100 A. 340 (Caruso v. Town of Montclair) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.