In Re Hubert
133 A. 920, 99 N.J. Eq. 886, 14 Stock. 886, 1926 N.J. LEXIS 511
Opinion
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Baches.
For affirmance — Parker, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbaoh, Campbell, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, MoGlennon, Kays, Hetpield, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In Re Hubert, 133 A. 920, 99 N.J. Eq. 886, 14 Stock. 886, 1926 N.J. LEXIS 511 (N.J. 1926).
133 A. 920 (In Re Hubert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In Re Hosford
98 A.2d 332 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)
Lasasso v. Lasasso
63 A.2d 526 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1949)
Lundie v. Walker
9 A.2d 783 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1939)