Edmund D. Cook, Inc. v. Commercial Casualty Insurance
190 A. 102, 117 N.J.L. 440, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 195
Opinion
Such of the grounds of appeal as exhibit claimed errors of law in the judgment under review are without substance. As to these, it suffices to say that Judge Oliphant properly construed the condition of the bond in suit. And there was evidence of a breach.
The judgment is accordingly affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Edmund D. Cook, Inc. v. Commercial Casualty Insurance, 190 A. 102, 117 N.J.L. 440, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 195 (N.J. 1937).
190 A. 102 (Edmund D. Cook, Inc. v. Commercial Casualty Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Public Service Electric & Gas Co. v. Technology for Energy, Corp. (In Re Technology for Energy, Corp.)
123 B.R. 979 (E.D. Tennessee, 1991)