Walter v. Introcaso
52 A.2d 676, 135 N.J.L. 461, 1947 N.J. LEXIS 222
Opinion
The judgment under review will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Ackerson.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Bodine, Donges, Colie, Waohenfeld, Eastwood, Wells, Rafferty, Dill, Freund, McGeehan, McLean, JJ. 14.
For reversal — Hehbr, J. 1.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Walter v. Introcaso, 52 A.2d 676, 135 N.J.L. 461, 1947 N.J. LEXIS 222 (N.J. 1947).
52 A.2d 676 (Walter v. Introcaso) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
WOODMONT PROPERTIES, LLC v. TOWNSHIP OF WESTAMPTON (L-2494-18, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2022
Butterworth v. Morgan
22 So. 3d 473 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 2008)
PNC Bank v. Axelsson
860 A.2d 1021 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2004)
Estate of Einsiedler v. Commissioner
1994 T.C. Memo. 155 (U.S. Tax Court, 1994)
Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Ass'n v. City of Camden
545 A.2d 127 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1988)
Camp Clearwater, Inc. v. Plock
146 A.2d 527 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1958)
Township of Woodbridge v. Pavel
66 A.2d 902 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1949)