State v. Lodico
95 A. 626, 88 N.J.L. 394, 1915 N.J. LEXIS 343
This text of 95 A. 626 (State v. Lodico) 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
State v. Lodico, 95 A. 626, 88 N.J.L. 394, 1915 N.J. LEXIS 343 (N.J. 1915).
Opinion
The judgment under review should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the per curiam opinion of the Supreme Court.
For affirmance—The Chancellor, Swayze, Trenciiard, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Black, Vredenbubgh, IIeppenheimer, Williams, Taylor, JJ. 11.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Israelson v. Saul
D. Alaska, 2019
State v. Smith
163 P. 759 (Washington Supreme Court, 1917)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
95 A. 626, 88 N.J.L. 394, 1915 N.J. LEXIS 343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lodico-nj-1915.