Case ID: njl_137/html/0661-01.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

MICHAEL CAPPADONNA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. PASSAIC MOTORS, INC., PROSECUTOR-RESPONDENT.
    Submitted May 28, 1948
    Decided September 3, 1948.
    For the defendant-appellant, Aaron J Letter and Dominick De Muro.
    
    For the prosecutor-respondent, Kalisch A Kalisch, (fsidor Kalisch).
    
   Per Curiam.

The questions are chiefly on the facts, and since there is supporting proof we are bound as to them by the Supreme Court decision. Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co., 129 N. J. L. 399; Suburban Land Improvement Co. v. Vailsburgh, 68 Id. 311. In so far as the dispute is of law we affirm, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bodine filed in the Supreme Court.

The judgment below is affirmed.

For affirmance — Tub Chancellor, Chief Justice, Donges, Colie, Eastwood, Burling, Jacobs, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, Scttettino, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.