Case ID: njl_109/html/0268-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ARTHUR L. KUGEL, RESPONDENT, v. CHARLES M. RIEDELL, APPELLANT.
    Submitted October 30, 1931 —
    Decided May 16, 1932.
    For the respondent, Milton M. Unger.
    
    For the appellant, Harrison & Roche.
    
   Per Curiam.

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

For affirmance — -Pabkee, Campbell, Case, Bodine, Donges, Yan Buskirk, Kays, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Keeney, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.