Jones v. Bayonne Barrel & Drum Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Jones v. Bayonne Barrel & Drum Co.

204 A.2d 4, 43 N.J. 279, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 152

DecidedOctober 19, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 204 A.2d 4 (Jones v. Bayonne Barrel & Drum Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jones v. Bayonne Barrel & Drum Co., 204 A.2d 4, 43 N.J. 279, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 152 (N.J. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered

Pee CueiaM.

This is a workmen’s compensation case which came to us as of right because of a dissent in the Appellate Division. R. R. 1:2-l (b). The Division of Workmen’s Compensation, the county court, and the majority of the Appellate Division found for petitioner, albeit their factual theses were [280]*280not concordant. We are not persuaded to disturb the judgment. It is accordingly affirmed.

For affirmance —■ Chief Justice WeiNTRaub, and Justices Jaoobs, FRANCIS, Prootor, Haul, Sohettino and HaNe-MAN — 7. For reversal — None.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered

Pee CueiaM.

This is a workmen’s compensation case which came to us as of right because of a dissent in the Appellate Division. R. R. 1:2-l (b). The Division of Workmen’s Compensation, the county court, and the majority of the Appellate Division found for petitioner, albeit their factual theses were [280]*280not concordant. We are not persuaded to disturb the judgment. It is accordingly affirmed.

For affirmance —■ Chief Justice WeiNTRaub, and Justices Jaoobs, FRANCIS, Prootor, Haul, Sohettino and HaNe-MAN — 7. For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.2d 4, 43 N.J. 279, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-bayonne-barrel-drum-co-nj-1964.