Case Name: JOHN F. CONRAD, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. EWALD BROEKER ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1904-09-30
Citations: 71 N.J.L. 341
Docket Number: 
Parties: JOHN F. CONRAD, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. EWALD BROEKER ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 71
Pages: 341–341

Head Matter:
JOHN F. CONRAD, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. EWALD BROEKER ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.
Argued March, 1904
Decided September 30, 1904.
On error to the Supreme Court.
For the plaintiff in error, James C. Connolly.
For the defendant in error, Patrick U. Cilhooly.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The state of the case furnished to the court discloses no exceptions authenticated by the judge upon which error has been assigned. For this omission the court deems it impossible to disturb the judgment, and it must therefore be affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Dixon, Garrison, Fort, Pitney, Swayze, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Vroom, Green, Gray. 11.
For reversal — Hone.