Case ID: nj-eq_94/html/0495-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph M. W. Kitchen, complainant, v. John O. H. Pitney et al., defendants.
    [Decided February 1st, 1923.]
    On appeal of Harry Longworth. Morris et al.
    On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Fielder, whose opinion is reported in 94 N. J. Eq. 485.
    
    
      Mr. SacTcett M. Dickinson, for the comnlainant.
    
      Messrs,. Howe & Davis, Messrs. Pitney, Hadin & Skinner, Messrs. Lum, Tanvblyn & Colyer and Messrs. McCarter & English, for the defendants.
   Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Fielder.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Swayze, Teenci-iard, Parker, Bergen, Mintuen, Black, Katzenbaoh, White, Heppenheimer, Williams, Gardner, Ackerson, Van Buskirk—14.

For reversal—None.