State v. Codington
85 A. 1135, 82 N.J.L. 728, 53 Vroom 728, 1911 N.J. LEXIS 261
Opinion
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Chief Justice in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance—The Chancellob, Gaeeison, Swayze, Bebgen, Vookhees, Kalisch, Bogeet, Ykedenbuegh, •Congdon, Sullivan, White, JJ. 11.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Codington, 85 A. 1135, 82 N.J.L. 728, 53 Vroom 728, 1911 N.J. LEXIS 261 (N.J. 1911).
85 A. 1135 (State v. Codington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Hanly
317 A.2d 746 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1974)
In Re Jeck
98 A.2d 319 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)