Case ID: njl_80/html/0459-01.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

HARRY D. AUSTRIAN, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. JULIUS LAUBHEIM, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.
    Argued June 29, 1910
    Decided November 14, 1910.
    On error to the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 49 Vroom 178.
    Eor the plaintiff in error, Merritt Lane and Harry Lane.
    
    Por the defendant in error, Warren Dixon.
    
   Per Curiam.

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

For affirmance—The Chancellor, Garrison, Trenohard, Bergen, Yoorhees, Minturn, Bogert, Yredenburgh, Yeoom, Dill, Congdon, JJ. 11.

For reversal—None.