Case ID: njl_108/html/0208-01.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

WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN ET AL., RESPONDENTS. WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN, CENTRAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
    Submitted February 13, 1931
    Decided April 24, 1931.
    For the appellant, Joseph H. Carr.
    
    For the respondents, Walter S. Keown, George D. Bothermel, Edward L. Katzenbach (Charles C. Savage, Jr., of the Pennsylvania bar, on the brief).
   Per Curiam.

The judgments under review will be affirmed for the reasons given in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bodine in the Supreme Court, ubi supra.

We note that the language of the resolution of the board of freeholders is slightly misquoted. Instead of the word ‘%ts for said new development,” the resolution should read “lands for said new road.” The difference is unimportant, but the correction is made in the interest of verbal accuracy.

No. 156—

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Daly, Van Buskirk, Kays, Dear, Wells, JJ. 10.

For reversal — None.

No. 157—

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Lloyd, Case, Daly, Van Buskirk, Kays, Dear, Wells, JJ. 9.

For reversal — None.