Morgan v. Susino Construction Co.
36 A.2d 604, 131 N.J.L. 329, 1944 N.J. LEXIS 203
Opinion
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for tlie reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Chief Justice in the Supreme Court; reserving, however, any expression as to the rights of an unborn child not within the *330 statutory provision. See Stemmer v. Kline, 128 N. J. L. 455.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Parker, Case, Donges, Perskie, Porter, Dear, Hague, Thompson, Dill, JJ. 10.
For reversal — Heiier, Wells, Raeeerty, JJ. 3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Morgan v. Susino Construction Co., 36 A.2d 604, 131 N.J.L. 329, 1944 N.J. LEXIS 203 (N.J. 1944).
36 A.2d 604 (Morgan v. Susino Construction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Giardina v. Bennett
545 A.2d 139 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1988)
Smith v. Givens
290 S.E.2d 844 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1982)
S. L. W. v. Alaska Workmen's Compensation Board
490 P.2d 42 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1971)
Kolakowski v. Thomas Mfg. Corp.
212 A.2d 786 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1965)
Ashman v. Madigan
122 A.2d 382 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1956)
BARR'S NEXT OF KIN v. Cherokee, Inc.
68 S.E.2d 440 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1951)