Public Service Railway Co. v. Barnett
This text of 116 A. 793 (Public Service Railway Co. v. Barnett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The only difference between this case and Public Service Railway Co. v. Reinhardt, just decided, is that the defendant took out one polic3r of insurance of $5,000, covering the cities of Elizabeth and Newark. This was condemned in Fischer v. Politt, by the supreme court in an opinion filed by Mr. Justice Minturn, January 17th, 1921 (not yet reported), in which he affirmed, a conviction, under the Kates act, for operating where the bond filed included liability occurring in two municipalities. This, however, as indicated in the Reinhardt Case, complainant cannot take advantage of.
A decree will be advised dismissing the bill.'
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
116 A. 793, 92 N.J. Eq. 372, 7 Stock. 372, 1921 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/public-service-railway-co-v-barnett-njch-1921.