Case ID: njl_113/html/0399-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ANTHIME DOWNING, RESPONDENT, v. OXWELD ACETYLENE COMPANY, APPELLANT.
    Argued May 17, 1934
    — Decided September 27, 1934.
    Ror the respondent, Edward G. Burice.
    
    Ror the appellant, Kellogg & Chance.
    
   Pee Curiam.

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

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Parker, Lloyd, Bodine, Donges, Peeskie, Yan Buskibk, Kays, Deae, JJ. 9.

For reversal — Case, Heteield, Wells, JJ. 3.