Case ID: nj-eq_100/html/0361-01.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

Catharine Bloomer, appellant v. Catharine Bloomer et al., executors, &c., respondents.
    [Decided October 27th, 1926.]
    On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Ingersoll, whose opinion is reported in 98 N. J. Eq. 576.
    
    
      Messrs. Cole & Dole, for the appellant.
    
      Mr.'Peter Baches, for the respondents.
   Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be 'affirmed, for the -reasons expressed in the opinion of the court below.

For affirmance — -The Chiee-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell,' Lloyd, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, McGlennón, Kays, Heteield, JJ. 15.

For reversal — None.