Katz v. Zapela

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Katz v. Zapela

163 A. 662, 110 N.J.L. 14, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 404

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 5, 1933·Published

Opinion

*15 Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam, in the Supreme Court, and printed in 10 N. J. Mis. R. 258.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chiee Justice, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Brogan, Heher, Van Buskirk, Kays, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Kerney, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

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

*15 Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam, in the Supreme Court, and printed in 10 N. J. Mis. R. 258.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chiee Justice, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Brogan, Heher, Van Buskirk, Kays, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Kerney, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

Katz v. Zapela, 163 A. 662, 110 N.J.L. 14, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 404 (N.J. 1933).

Pincite

163 A. 662 (Katz v. Zapela) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.