Hoblitzell v. Howard

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Hoblitzell v. Howard

112 A.2d 715, 18 N.J. 104, 1955 N.J. LEXIS 237

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided March 28, 1955·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Ereund in the court below.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Vanderbilt, and Justices Heher, Wachenfeld, Jacobs and Brennan — 5. For affirmance of disallowance of counsel fees to plaintiff and for reversal with instructions to enter judgment for defendants — Justices Oliphant and Burling — 2.

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

Pee Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Ereund in the court below.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Vanderbilt, and Justices Heher, Wachenfeld, Jacobs and Brennan — 5. For affirmance of disallowance of counsel fees to plaintiff and for reversal with instructions to enter judgment for defendants — Justices Oliphant and Burling — 2.

Hoblitzell v. Howard, 112 A.2d 715, 18 N.J. 104, 1955 N.J. LEXIS 237 (N.J. 1955).

Pincite

112 A.2d 715 (Hoblitzell v. Howard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related