Jaeckle v. L. Bamberger & Co.

184 A. 520, 120 N.J. Eq. 201, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 688
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided April 24, 1936·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree dismissing the bill of complaint is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the learned vice-chancellor.

The question of the jurisdiction of equity to grant the relief sought by complainants is reserved.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hehee, Hetfield, Deae, Wells, WolfsKeil, JJ. 9.

For reversal — Lloyd, Pebsiue, Raffeety, JJ. 3.

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

Jaeckle v. L. Bamberger & Co., 184 A. 520, 120 N.J. Eq. 201, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 688 (N.J. 1936).

184 A. 520 (Jaeckle v. L. Bamberger & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

NJ Optometric Ass'n v. Hillman-Kohan Eyeglasses, Inc.
365 A.2d 956 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
Weston v. NJ State Bd. of Optometrists
108 A.2d 632 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1954)
Lipman v. Forman
49 A.2d 236 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1946)
Mosig v. Jersey Chiropodists, Inc.
194 A. 248 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1937)