Hoffman v. Carter

192 A. 825, 118 N.J.L. 379, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 308
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided July 7, 1937·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Bodine in the Supreme Court; except, however, that the affirmance as to Columbia Broadcasting System, Incorporated, is upon the ground that it was not served with process. We reserve decision as to whether the delivery at radio receivers in this state of programs transmitted by the Columbia company from its New York studio in any sense or to any degree constituted the doing of business by it in this state.

*380 For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Donges, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, JJ. 10.

For affirmance in part — Perskie, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 3.

For reversal — Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 2.

For reversal in part — Hetfield, J. 1.

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

Hoffman v. Carter, 192 A. 825, 118 N.J.L. 379, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 308 (N.J. 1937).

192 A. 825 (Hoffman v. Carter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wanamaker v. Lewis
153 F. Supp. 195 (D. Maryland, 1957)
Piedras Negras Broadcasting Co. v. Commissioner
43 B.T.A. 297 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1941)
Deighan v. Everage Retailer Weekly & Trade Newspaper Corp.
16 A.2d 612 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1940)