Case ID: nj-eq_100/html/0357-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Cubiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Otto Venino, Jr., appellant, v. August Naegele et al., respondents.
    [Decided October 27th, 1926.]
    On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Yice-Chancellor Bentley, whose opinion is reported in 99 N. J. Eq. 183.
    
    
      Mr. J. Emil Walscheid, for the appellant.
    
      Mr. Robert Carey, for the respondents.
   Pee Cubiam.

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

For affirmance — The Ohiee-Justice, Tbehchaed, Pae-KEE, MlHTUBH, KaLISCH, ¿LACK, KaTZEHBACH, CAMPBELL, Lloyd, White, Gabdheb, Yah Buskiek, McGlehhoh, Kays, Hetpield, JJ. 15.

For reversal — -None.