Case ID: njl_96/html/0298-01.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

MONROE HOTEL COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. ESTATE OF RICHARD B. SOMERS, HELENA S. CONOVER ET AL., EXECUTRIX, ETC., RESPONDENTS.
    Argued March 3, 1921
    Decided November 21, 1921.
    The judges being equally divided on the question whether the judgment should be reversed, the judgment is affirmed, solely because of such division, which renders any opinion by the court impossible.
    On appeal from the Atlantic County Circuit Court.
    This was a suit to recover on the endorsement of a promis•sory note. Upon plaintiff's counsel opening the case to the court and jury, counsel for defendants, moved to nonsuit the plaintiff upon the ground that the facts offered to be proved did not constitute a cause for action against the defendants. The trial judge granted the motion. ' From the judgment thereupon entered the plaintiff has appealed to this court.
    For the appellant, Clairence L. Goldenberg.
    
    For the respondents^ Thompson & Hanstein.
    
   Per Curiam.

. The judges being equally divided on the question whether the judgment should be' reversed, the judgment is affirmed, solely because of such division, which renders any opinion, by the court impossible.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Ci-iiee Justice, Swayze, Bergen, Minturn, Black, Williams, JJ. 7.

For reversal—Parker, Kalisci-i, Katzenbaci-t, White, Heppeni-leimer, Gardner, Ackerson, JJ. 7.