Case ID: njl_124/html/0450-01.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

MARGARET STEINMETZ, RESPONDENT, v. SNEAD & COMPANY, APPELLANT.
    Submitted February 16, 1940
    Decided April 25, 1940.
    For the appellant, Kellogg & Chance.
    
    For the respondent, William T. Cahill.
    
   Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Perskie in the Supreme Court and reported in 123 N. J. L. 497.

For affirmance—The Chief Justice, Case, Donges, Heher, Porter, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Hague, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.