Home/Supreme Court of New Jersey/Hardcastle v. Stiles

Hardcastle v. Stiles

59 A. 1117, 70 N.J.L. 828, 1904 N.J. LEXIS 172
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedSeptember 30, 1904
StatusPublished

This text of 59 A. 1117 (Hardcastle v. Stiles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hardcastle v. Stiles, 59 A. 1117, 70 N.J.L. 828, 1904 N.J. LEXIS 172 (N.J. 1904).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment in this cause is affirmed, for the reasons given in the opinion of Mr. Justice Van Syekel in the Supreme Court, reported, in 40 Vroom 551.

For affirmance — Tiie Chancellor., Dixon, G-arrison, Fort, Pitney, Swayzb, Bogert, AHiedenbuegii, Vroom, Green, Gray. 11. For reversal — None.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hardcastle v. Stiles & McClay
55 A. 104 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1903)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 A. 1117, 70 N.J.L. 828, 1904 N.J. LEXIS 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hardcastle-v-stiles-nj-1904.