Case Name: EDWARD BRAUTIGAM, RESPONDENT, v. DEAN & COMPANY, APPELLANT
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1914-11-16
Citations: 86 N.J.L. 676
Docket Number: 
Parties: EDWARD BRAUTIGAM, RESPONDENT, v. DEAN & COMPANY, APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 86
Pages: 676–676

Head Matter:
EDWARD BRAUTIGAM, RESPONDENT, v. DEAN & COMPANY, APPELLANT.
Argued June 25, 1914
Decided November 16, 1914.
On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 85 N. J. L. 549.
For the appellant, Osborne & Asiley and Monroe Wheeler (of the New York bar).
For the respondent, Charles C. Kelly and Theodore Burode.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We agree w'th the Supreme Court that it was error to non-suit the plaintiff, but we do not agree that upon the ease made at the trial the plaintiff was entitled to recover the $10,000 he had invested in the capital stock of a corporation. How the failure of a corporation to live up to its contracts can undo a stock-buying transaction, which is a statutory matter, is not at all clear, and to avoid any misapprehension, we wish it understood that no such matter is decided by us.
The judgment of the Supreme Court is affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Garrison, Swayze, Trenohard, Bergen, Minturn, Black, Bogert, YredenBURGH, HePPBNITEIMER, WILLIAMS, JJ. 11.
For reversal — None.