Columbia Insurance v. Artale

168 A. 304, 114 N.J. Eq. 268, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 906

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree will he affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion below.

We express no opinion upon the propriety of the award to appellant' Lieblich, of a lien on the proceeds of the sale of the mortgaged premises, for attorney’s services rendered to his co-appellants, Emanuel Artale and Mamie Artale. The latter have not raised the. question, and it is therefore not before us.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Yan Bus-kirk, Kays, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, Dill, JJ. 14.

For reversal — -Hone.