Case ID: nj-eq_45/html/0889-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam. Mr. Justice Dixon", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

George W. Mount, appellant, v. Clarence M. Slack, respondent.
    On appeal from a decree of the vice-ordinary, whose opinion is reported in Mount v. Slack, 18 Stew. Eq. 129.
    
    
      Mr. George O. Vanderbilt, for the appellant.
    
      Mr. Silas D. Grimstead, for the respondent.
   Per Curiam.

This decree affirmed, for the reasons given by the vice-ordinary.

Mr. Justice Dixon

(dissenting) stated orally that, in his opinion, the commissions in this case ought to have been divided equally between the two administrators.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Depue, Garrison, Magie, Reed, Brown, Clement, Cole, McGregor, Smith —10.

For reversal — Dixon, Van Syckel, Whitaker — 3.