Skladzien v. Board Education, Bayonne

178 A. 793, 115 N.J.L. 203, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 292
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided May 17, 1935·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Van Buskirk, Heteield, Dear, JJ. 8.

For reversal — Donges, Perskie, Kays, Wells, JJ. 4.

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

Skladzien v. Board Education, Bayonne, 178 A. 793, 115 N.J.L. 203, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 292 (N.J. 1935).

178 A. 793 (Skladzien v. Board Education, Bayonne) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gonzalez v. BD. OF ED., UNION CTY.
738 A.2d 974 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1999)
Cabarle v. Governing Body of Tp. of Pemberton
400 A.2d 548 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1979)
In Re the Summit and Elizabeth Trust Co.
268 A.2d 21 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1970)
Rall v. Board of Ed. of the City of Bayonne
249 A.2d 616 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1969)
BD. OF ED. OF VOC. SCHOOL v. Finne
210 A.2d 794 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1965)
Valvano v. BD. OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF UNION COUNTY
183 A.2d 450 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1962)
Talty v. BOARD OF EDUCATION, SCH. DIST. OF CITY OF HOBOKEN
89 A.2d 391 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1952)
Lohsen v. Borough of Keansburg
73 A.2d 177 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1950)
DeBow v. Township of Lakewood
36 A.2d 605 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1944)
Rotherham v. Grece
183 A. 291 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1936)