Case Name: EDMUND D. VANDERBILT ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. KATE A. MIAL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1914-03-16
Citations: 86 N.J.L. 375
Docket Number: 
Parties: EDMUND D. VANDERBILT ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. KATE A. MIAL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 86
Pages: 375–375

Head Matter:
EDMUND D. VANDERBILT ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. KATE A. MIAL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Submitted December 15, 1913
Decided March 16, 1914.
On appeal from the Hudson County Circuit Court.
For the plaintiffs-respondents, Rudolph Schroeder and John D. Pierson.
For the defendant-appellant, Samuel A. Besson.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons firstly and secondly expressed in the opinion delivered by the Chancellor in the case of Davis v. Mial, at the present term of this court, ante p. 167.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalis on, Bogert, Yredenburgii, Congdon, White, Heppenheimer, JJ. 13.
For reversal — Hone.