Case Name: Walter Reade, complainant-appellant, v. Thomas F. McKenna, defendant-respondent
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1927-05-16
Citations: 101 N.J. Eq. 304
Docket Number: 
Parties: Walter Reade, complainant-appellant, v. Thomas F. McKenna, defendant-respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 101
Pages: 304–304

Head Matter:
Walter Reade, complainant-appellant, v. Thomas F. McKenna, defendant-respondent.
[Argued February 10th, 1927.
Decided May 16th, 1927.]
Mr. Herbert J. Hannoch, for the appellant.
Mr. John Dreiven, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The circumstances of the case are fully set out in the opinion filed by the learned vicemhancellor, ubi supra. In our view it is sufficient for an affirmance to say that his finding that the contract had been abandoned by mutual assent of the defendant and the authorized agent of complainant, is fully justified by the evidence. This makes it unnecessary to go into the other phases of the case.
The decree will be affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Van Bus-kirk, McGlennon, Kays, Hetfield, Dear, JJ.' 12.
For reversal — None.