Doe v. Eggleston
146 A. 175, 106 N.J.L. 565, 1929 N.J. LEXIS 190
Opinion
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Teenchaed, Paekee, Kalisch, Campbell, McGlennon, Hetfield, Deae, JJ. 8.
For reversal — White, Van Buskiek, Kays, JJ. 3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Doe v. Eggleston, 146 A. 175, 106 N.J.L. 565, 1929 N.J. LEXIS 190 (N.J. 1929).
146 A. 175 (Doe v. Eggleston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Stewart v. Brock
290 P.2d 682 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1955)
Winter v. Toldt
108 A.2d 648 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1954)
Hamrick v. Cooper River Lumber Co.
74 S.E.2d 575 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1953)