Case ID: njl_59/html/0268-01.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

PETER HERTER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE GOSS & EDSALL COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
    
    On error to the Supreme Court. For opinion of the Supreme Court, see 28 Vroom 42.
    For the plaintiff in error, William D. Daly.
    
    For the defendant in error, Dickinson, Thompson & McMaster.
    
    
      
      Tlie report of this case should have appeared with the opinions of March Term, 1895, in 28 Vroom.—Rep.
    
   Per Curiam

The judgment below is affirmed, for the reasons given by the Supreme Court.

For affirmance—The Chancellor, Gummere, Eeed, Van Syckel, Brown. 5.

For reversal—Dixon, Bogert,. Krueger, Sims. 4.