Feighan v. Sobers
91 A. 1068, 86 N.J.L. 356, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 264
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Feighan v. Sobers. Read the opinion of the Court — 84 N.J.L. 575 →
Opinion
The judgment under review heroin should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Voorjiees in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — Tt-te Chancellor, Chief Justice, Garrison, Swayze, T ken chard, Bergen, Minturn, Bogert, Vredenburgh, White, Heppenheimek, JJ. 11.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Feighan v. Sobers, 91 A. 1068, 86 N.J.L. 356, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 264 (N.J. 1914).
91 A. 1068 (Feighan v. Sobers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.