Hartman v. McClintic-Marshall Construction Co.
82 A. 874, 82 N.J.L. 734, 53 Vroom 734, 1912 N.J. LEXIS 293
Opinion
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
For affirmance—The Chancellor, Garrison, Swayze, Parker, Bergen, Voorhees, Kaijsch, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Vroom, Congdon, White, Treacy, JJ. 13.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hartman v. McClintic-Marshall Construction Co., 82 A. 874, 82 N.J.L. 734, 53 Vroom 734, 1912 N.J. LEXIS 293 (N.J. 1912).
82 A. 874 (Hartman v. McClintic-Marshall Construction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.