Case ID: nj-eq_129/html/0114-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rose Gold Richman, complainant-respondent, v. Harry Richman, defendant-appellant.
    [Decided February 3d, 1941.]
    
      
      Mr. Reuben P. Goldstein {Mr. Maurice O. Brigadier, of counsel), for the appellant.
    
      Messrs. Levenson, Gomen <& Levenson, for the respondent.
   Pee Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Advisory Master Herr in the Court of Chancery.

For affirmance — Dofges, Perskie, Porter, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Hague, JJ. 7.

For reversal — The Chiee-Justioe, Parker, Case, Bodine, I-Ieher, Raeeerty, JJ. 6.