Home/Supreme Court of New Jersey/Heath v. Maddock

Heath v. Maddock

91 A. 1069, 82 N.J. Eq. 366, 12 Buchanan 366, 1913 N.J. LEXIS 371
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided November 17, 1913·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons 'stated in-the opinion filed in the court below by the ordinary.

For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenohard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kaliscit, Vreden-BUHGI-I, CONGDON, WHITE, TERI-IUNE, ITePPBNHÉIMER-13. ■ ■ • For reversal—-None.

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

Heath v. Maddock, 91 A. 1069, 82 N.J. Eq. 366, 12 Buchanan 366, 1913 N.J. LEXIS 371 (N.J. 1913).

91 A. 1069 (Heath v. Maddock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Austin v. Millard
395 A.2d 1267 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1978)
Bartel v. Clarenbach
274 A.2d 841 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1971)
Clark v. State Bar
246 P.2d 1 (California Supreme Court, 1952)