Case Name: Joseph P. Rosenfeld, complainant-appellant, v. Roebling Coal Co., Inc., a corporation of New York, et al., defendants-respondents
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1939-04-21
Citations: 125 N.J. Eq. 348
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joseph P. Rosenfeld, complainant-appellant, v. Roebling Coal Co., Inc., a corporation of New York, et al., defendants-respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 125
Pages: 348–348

Head Matter:
Joseph P. Rosenfeld, complainant-appellant, v. Roebling Coal Co., Inc., a corporation of New York, et al., defendants-respondents.
[Submitted February term, 1939.
Decided April 21st, 1939.]
Mr. Abraham M. Herman, for the complainant-appellant.
Mr. Charles C. Pilgrim, for the defendants-respondents.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We have carefully examined the record and the arguments of counsel in this cause. The conclusion of the learned vice-chancellor, who dismissed the complainant's hill seeking a receiver for the defendant company, was in all respects proper, because the bill lacked proofs and was insufficient.
The decree of dismissal is, therefore, affirmed.
For affirmance — Ti-ie Chief-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Porter, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Hague, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.