Humphrey v. Eakeley

65 A. 1118, 74 N.J.L. 599, 45 Vroom 599, 1907 N.J. LEXIS 174
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 2, 1907·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The judgment brought here by this writ óf error is affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Garrison in the Supreme Court, reported in 43 Vroom 425.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chancellor, Ci-iiee Justice, Fort, Garretson, Hendrickson, Pitney, Eeed, Trenci-iard, Bogert, Vredenburgii, Vroom, Green, Gray, Dill, J.J. 14.

For reversal — None.

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

Humphrey v. Eakeley, 65 A. 1118, 74 N.J.L. 599, 45 Vroom 599, 1907 N.J. LEXIS 174 (N.J. 1907).

65 A. 1118 (Humphrey v. Eakeley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Better Home Furniture Co. of Winston-Salem v. Baron
91 S.E.2d 236 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1956)