Case Name: WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN ET AL., RESPONDENTS; WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN, CENTRAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ET AL., RESPONDENTS
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1931-04-24
Citations: 108 N.J.L. 208
Docket Number: 
Parties: WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN ET AL., RESPONDENTS. WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN, CENTRAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 108
Pages: 208–209

Head Matter:
WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN ET AL., RESPONDENTS. WILMAR COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CAMDEN, CENTRAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
Submitted February 13, 1931
Decided April 24, 1931.
For the appellant, Joseph H. Carr.
For the respondents, Walter S. Keown, George D. Bothermel, Edward L. Katzenbach (Charles C. Savage, Jr., of the Pennsylvania bar, on the brief).

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgments under review will be affirmed for the reasons given in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bodine in the Supreme Court, ubi supra.
We note that the language of the resolution of the board of freeholders is slightly misquoted. Instead of the word '%ts for said new development," the resolution should read "lands for said new road." The difference is unimportant, but the correction is made in the interest of verbal accuracy.
No. 156—
For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Daly, Van Buskirk, Kays, Dear, Wells, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None.
No. 157—
For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Lloyd, Case, Daly, Van Buskirk, Kays, Dear, Wells, JJ. 9.
For reversal — None.