Schultz v. Johnson

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Schultz v. Johnson

160 A. 379, 110 N.J. Eq. 566, 1932 N.J. LEXIS 820

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedMay 16, 1932

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 160 A. 379 (Schultz v. Johnson) 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

Schultz v. Johnson, 160 A. 379, 110 N.J. Eq. 566, 1932 N.J. LEXIS 820 (N.J. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

*569 Per Curiam.

The decree under review will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Vice-Chancellor Learning.

The grounds stated by him for refusing a preliminary injunction go to the root of the case, and his decision to dismiss the bill as not showing a ease for equitable relief was a necessary result of the reasoning contained in the opinion, which we adopt as adequate for an affirmance of the decree under review.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Tbenchaed, Paeeee, Campbell, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Van Buskibk, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, Wells, Keeney, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

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