Case Name: ANTHONY SINDONI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. STEPHANO LA ROSA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1914-03-06
Citations: 86 N.J.L. 370
Docket Number: 
Parties: ANTHONY SINDONI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. STEPHANO LA ROSA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 86
Pages: 370–370

Head Matter:
ANTHONY SINDONI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. STEPHANO LA ROSA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Argued March 6, 1914
Decided March 6, 1914.
On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which court the following per curiam was filed:
The judgment of the District Court is affirmed. It was a fact case and properly submitted to the jury.
For the plaintiff-respondent, Bourgeois & Coulomb.
For the defendant-appellant, Garrison & Voorhees.

Opinion:
Pee Curiam.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court affirming a judgment of the District Court of Atlantic City. The affirmance in the Supreme Court was put upon the ground that it was a fact case and was properly submitted to the jury. We concur in that view, and, consequently, as there is evidence to sustain the finding of the Supreme Court, upon familiar principles, it will not be disturbed.
For affirmance- — Th e Chancellor, Ci-iiee Justice, Teencitard, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Congdon, White, Heppenheimer- JJ. 11.
For reversal — None.