Case Name: KATHRYN B. HOWARD, RESPONDENT, v. MORGENWECK, INCORPORATED, AND BORNOT, INCORPORATED, SEVERALLY, JOINTLY AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, APPELLANTS
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1932-01-20
Citations: 10 N.J. Misc. 117
Docket Number: 
Parties: KATHRYN B. HOWARD, RESPONDENT, v. MORGENWECK, INCORPORATED, AND BORNOT, INCORPORATED, SEVERALLY, JOINTLY AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, APPELLANTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 10
Pages: 117–117

Head Matter:
KATHRYN B. HOWARD, RESPONDENT, v. MORGENWECK, INCORPORATED, AND BORNOT, INCORPORATED, SEVERALLY, JOINTLY AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, APPELLANTS.
Submitted October 16, 1931
Decided January 20, 1932.
Before Justices Campbell, Lloyd and Bodine.
For the appellants, Elmer G. Van Name.
For the respondent, Nathan Blank.

Opinion:
Pee Cubiam.
In this case no specification of the determinations of the District Court with respect to which the appellants are dissatisfied, as required by rule 145 of this court, is presented; there is, therefore, nothing before us for review.
The appeal is dismissed, with costs.