Edmund D. Cook, Inc. v. Commercial Casualty Insurance

190 A. 102, 117 N.J.L. 440, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 195
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 22, 1937·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*441 Per Curiam.

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