Case Name: JAMES THOMAS, RESPONDENT, v. LIONDALE BLEACH, DYE AND PRINT WORKS, APPELLANT
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1933-01-23
Citations: 110 N.J.L. 27
Docket Number: 
Parties: JAMES THOMAS, RESPONDENT, v. LIONDALE BLEACH, DYE AND PRINT WORKS, APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 27–27

Head Matter:
JAMES THOMAS, RESPONDENT, v. LIONDALE BLEACH, DYE AND PRINT WORKS, APPELLANT.
Argued October 26, 1932
Decided January 23, 1933.
For the respondent, John C. Grimshaw.
For the appellant, Kellogg & Chance.

Opinion:
Pee Cueiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam in the Supreme Court, and printed in 10 N. J. Mis. R. 255.
For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Pabicee, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Beogan, Hehee, Kays, Hetfield, Wells, Keeney, JJ. 11.
For reversal — None.