O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Phoenix Assurance Co.

146 A. 370, 105 N.J.L. 642, 1929 N.J. LEXIS 290
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided May 20, 1929·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion by Judge Dungan in the Circuit Court.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Kalisch, Black, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 8.

For reversal — Campbell, Lloyd, Case, Van Buskiek, Hetfield, Dear, JJ. 6.

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

O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Phoenix Assurance Co., 146 A. 370, 105 N.J.L. 642, 1929 N.J. LEXIS 290 (N.J. 1929).

146 A. 370 (O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Phoenix Assurance Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

NJ Highway Authority v. Sills
268 A.2d 308 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1970)
Stephens v. Bongart
189 A. 131 (Essex County Family Court, 1937)
Weatherby v. Aetna Insurance
167 A. 877 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1933)