Case Name: WILLIAM SALISKY ET AL., PROSECUTORS-APPELLANTS, v. CITY OF GARFIELD, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1944-09-14
Citations: 132 N.J.L. 144
Docket Number: 
Parties: WILLIAM SALISKY ET AL., PROSECUTORS-APPELLANTS, v. CITY OF GARFIELD, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 132
Pages: 144–144

Head Matter:
WILLIAM SALISKY ET AL., PROSECUTORS-APPELLANTS, v. CITY OF GARFIELD, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Argued May 16, 1944
Decided September 14, 1944.
For the appellants, Breslin & Breslin (Carmen M. Belli, of counsel). ■
For the respondent, Carey tG Lane (Robert Carey and. Harry Lane, of counsel).

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Porter for the Supreme Court.
As respects the questions of fact, there was tangible evidence to support the findings, below; and it is elementary-in our jurisprudence that findings of fact on conflicting evidence, or on uncontroverted evidence reasonably susceptible of divergent inferences, are not reviewable on error.
It is also urged that the demotion of the superior officers two ranks instead of to the next rank below contravenes R. 8. 40:11-10.
It was conceded on the oral argument that this point was not raised on the brief submitted by appellant to the Supreme Court (there was no oral argument); and it is therefore not one for the consideration of this court, and we express no opinion respecting it.
Judgment affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chibe Justice, Parker, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Oolie, Dear, Wells, Raeeertx, Hague, Thompson, Dill, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.