Rickey v. Moon Clay & Kaolin Co.

108 A. 2, 89 N.J. Eq. 602, 4 Stock. 602, 1918 N.J. LEXIS 359
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedOctober 11, 1918
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 108 A. 2 (Rickey v. Moon Clay & Kaolin Co.) 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.

Bluebook
Rickey v. Moon Clay & Kaolin Co., 108 A. 2, 89 N.J. Eq. 602, 4 Stock. 602, 1918 N.J. LEXIS 359 (N.J. 1918).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Baches.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Bergen, Minturn, Black, White, Heprenheimer, Williams, Taylor — 10.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

SCHANTZ v. Rachlin
244 A.2d 328 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1968)
Mannillo v. Gorski
241 A.2d 276 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1968)
Cochran v. Planning Bd. of Summit
210 A.2d 99 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1965)
Bache & Co. v. General Instrument Corp.
180 A.2d 535 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1962)
Zahn v. Newark Board of Adjustment
133 A.2d 358 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1957)
Bowers v. American Bridge Co.
127 A.2d 580 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
108 A. 2, 89 N.J. Eq. 602, 4 Stock. 602, 1918 N.J. LEXIS 359, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rickey-v-moon-clay-kaolin-co-nj-1918.