Case ID: njl_91/html/0685-01.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

HOWARD CURTIS, RESPONDENT, v. CHARLES E. JOYCE, APPELLANT.
    Argued November 26, 1917
    Decided January 31, 1918.
    On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 90 N. J. L. 47.
    
      For the respondent, V. Claude Palmer.
    
    For the appellant, James Mercer Davis.
    
   Pee Cubiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Swayze in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — Garrison, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Black, White, Heppenheimer, Williams, Gardner, JJ. 9.

For reversal — None.