Vanderbilt v. Mial
90 A. 317, 86 N.J.L. 376, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 278
Opinion
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons firstly and secondly expressed in the opinion delivered by the Chancellor in the ease of Davis v. Mial, at the present term of this court, ante p. 167.
For affirmance — Ti-ie Chancellor, Chief Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisch, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Congdon, White, Heppen-HEIMER, JJ. 13.
For reversal — Hone.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Vanderbilt v. Mial, 90 A. 317, 86 N.J.L. 376, 1914 N.J. LEXIS 278 (N.J. 1914).
90 A. 317 (Vanderbilt v. Mial) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.