Case Name: JAMES P. BRUCE AND WILLIAM BRUCE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM H. PEARSALL, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1896-11
Citations: 59 N.J.L. 586
Docket Number: 
Parties: JAMES P. BRUCE AND WILLIAM BRUCE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM H. PEARSALL, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 59
Pages: 586–587

Head Matter:
JAMES P. BRUCE AND WILLIAM BRUCE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM H. PEARSALL, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
On error to the Supreme Court.* For opinion of the Supreme Court, see ante p. 62.
For the plaintiffs in error, Applegate & Degnan.
For the defendant in error, Edmund Wilson.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment of the Supreme Court is affirmed, for the reasons given by that court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Depue, Dixon,, Gummere, Lippincott, Van Syckel, Barkalow, Bogert, Dayton, Hendrickson, Krueger, Nixon. 12.
For reversal—None.