Sukman v. Ihle
133 A. 779, 100 N.J. Eq. 598
Opinion
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Bentley.
For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Tkenchakd, Mintubn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbacii, Campbell, Lloyd, Van Buskikk, McGlekkon, Kays, Heteield, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sukman v. Ihle, 133 A. 779, 100 N.J. Eq. 598 (N.J. 1927).
133 A. 779 (Sukman v. Ihle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Art Photo v. Kent Parking Garage
37 A.2d 419 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1944)
Hardy v. Hangen
34 A.2d 642 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1943)