Crocker-Wheeler Electric Co. v. Hill

41 A. 1115, 60 N.J.L. 241, 31 Vroom 241, 1897 N.J. LEXIS 49
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedMarch 15, 1897
StatusPublished

This text of 41 A. 1115 (Crocker-Wheeler Electric Co. v. Hill) 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.

Bluebook
Crocker-Wheeler Electric Co. v. Hill, 41 A. 1115, 60 N.J.L. 241, 31 Vroom 241, 1897 N.J. LEXIS 49 (N.J. 1897).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Supreme Court is affirmed, for the reasons given in its per curiam opinion.

For affirmance—The Chief Justice, Collins, Depue, Dixon, Gummere, Ludlow, Van Syokel, Dayton, Hendrickson, Nixon. 10.

For reversal—None.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 A. 1115, 60 N.J.L. 241, 31 Vroom 241, 1897 N.J. LEXIS 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crocker-wheeler-electric-co-v-hill-nj-1897.