Haytko v. William Crabb & Co.

91 A.2d 231, 21 N.J. Super. 330
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
DecidedSeptember 16, 1952
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 91 A.2d 231 (Haytko v. William Crabb & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Haytko v. William Crabb & Co., 91 A.2d 231, 21 N.J. Super. 330 (N.J. Ct. App. 1952).

Opinion

21 N.J. Super. 330 (1952)
91 A.2d 231

WILLIAM HAYTKO, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT,
v.
WILLIAM CRABB AND CO., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued September 8, 1952.
Decided September 16, 1952.

Before Judges JAYNE, PROCTOR, and SCHETTINO.

Mr. Marshall Crowley argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Toner, Crowley & Ackerman, attorneys; Mr. Robert A. Vanderbilt, on the brief).

Mr. Harry Cohn argued the cause for respondent.

The opinion of the court was delivered PER CURIAM.

We concur in the conclusion expressed by Judge Francis and reported in 17 N.J. Super. 95 (Co. Ct., Law Div., 1951).

Affirmed.

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

Related

Graham v. Green
156 A.2d 241 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1959)
O'NEIL v. Bilotta
91 A.2d 231 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 A.2d 231, 21 N.J. Super. 330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haytko-v-william-crabb-co-njsuperctappdiv-1952.