McCadden v. West End Building & Loan Ass'n
This text of 21 A.2d 737 (McCadden v. West End Building & Loan Ass'n) 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.
Opinion
The judgment of the Supreme Court is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Mr. Justice Perskie.
It is not contended that there is no sufficient basis in the evidence for the finding that the enucleation of the employee’s eye was due to the industrial accident; and we have not considered that question.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Case, Bodine, Donges, Fetter, Poetes, Colte, Deae, Wells, WolfsKetl, Rafferty, Hague, Thompson, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 A.2d 737, 127 N.J.L. 245, 1941 N.J. LEXIS 254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccadden-v-west-end-building-loan-assn-nj-1941.