Case Name: MARTIN TUCKER, RESPONDENT, v. FRANK J. BELTRAMO, INCORPORATED, APPELLANT
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1937-05-19
Citations: 118 N.J.L. 301
Docket Number: 
Parties: MARTIN TUCKER, RESPONDENT, v. FRANK J. BELTRAMO, INCORPORATED, APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 118
Pages: 301–301

Head Matter:
MARTIN TUCKER, RESPONDENT, v. FRANK J. BELTRAMO, INCORPORATED, APPELLANT.
Argued October 27, 1936
Decided May 19, 1937.
For the respondent, Isadore Rabinowitz.
For the appellant, Merritt Lane.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Heher in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.