Feigenspan v. Mulligan
53 A. 1124, 64 N.J. Eq. 792, 1902 N.J. LEXIS 212
Opinion
The decree appealed from is affirmed, for the reasons given in the court of chancery.
For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Van Syckel, Dixon, Collins, Port, Garretson, Hendrickson, Pitney, Bogert, Adams, Vredenburgi-i, Voorhees, Vroom—13.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Feigenspan v. Mulligan, 53 A. 1124, 64 N.J. Eq. 792, 1902 N.J. LEXIS 212 (N.J. 1902).
53 A. 1124 (Feigenspan v. Mulligan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
McCray v. Chrucky
173 A.2d 39 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1961)