Case ID: njl_121/html/0051-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THOMAS W. BUNTING, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THEODORE C. TIEDEKEN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. WILLIAM H. TIEDEKEN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. EARL W. TWITCHELL, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
    Argued May 18, 1938
    Decided September 16, 1938.
    For the plaintiff-appellant, Joseph Beck Tyler.
    
    For Thomas W. Bunting, Theodore C. Tiedeken and William H. Tiedeken, Boyle & Archer.
    
    For Earl W. Twitchell, Ralph N. Kellam.
    
   Per Curiam.

We have carefully examined the record in these cases and the briefs and argument of counsel and can only conclude that the questions of fact were property found and the questions of law were correctly settled by the learned trial judge.

The judgment is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Poster, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Walker, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.