Case ID: njl_104/html/0659-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN DINKEL, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF HUDSON, RESPONDENT.
    Argued February 9, 1928
    Decided May 14, 1928.
    For the appellant, Bichard McAghon.
    
    For the respondent, Thomas F. Meehan.
    
   Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — -The Chancellor, Parker, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Van Bus-kirk, Kays, Heteield, Dear, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.