Case ID: nj-eq_112/html/0090-01.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

James Radcliffe & Sons Company et al., respondents, v. Charles E. Knoble, Jr., et al., appellants.
    [Decided January 5th, 1933.]
    
      Mr. James N. Wright and Messrs. Sticlcel & Sticlcel, for the respondents.
    
      Frances Hart, for the appellants.
   Per Curiam.

The order appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Bigelow, and reported in 109 N. J. Eq. 309, sub nom. James Radcliffe, &c., Sons Co. v. Borough of Hawthorne.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Brogan, ECeher, Van Buskirk, Kays, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, Kerney, JJ. 16.

For reversal — None.