Morley v. McDonald
118 A. 582, 98 N.J.L. 275, 1922 N.J. LEXIS 294
Opinion
. The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Swayze, Parker, Kalis oil, Black, Katzenbach, White, Heppenheimee, Williams, Gardner, Ackerson, Van Bus-kirk, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Morley v. McDonald, 118 A. 582, 98 N.J.L. 275, 1922 N.J. LEXIS 294 (N.J. 1922).
118 A. 582 (Morley v. McDonald) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Registrar & Transfer Co. v. DIR. DIV. OF TAX.
385 A.2d 268 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1978)
Vanderhoof v. Crosby
166 A. 337 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1933)