Case Name: ROSE GLICKFELD, RESPONDENT, v. SYLVIA A. VENOKUR, TRADING, ETC., APPELLANT
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1938-01-26
Citations: 119 N.J.L. 431
Docket Number: 
Parties: ROSE GLICKFELD, RESPONDENT, v. SYLVIA A. VENOKUR, TRADING, ETC., APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 119
Pages: 431–432

Head Matter:
ROSE GLICKFELD, RESPONDENT, v. SYLVIA A. VENOKUR, TRADING, ETC., APPELLANT.
Argued October 23, 1937
Decided January 26, 1938.
For the appellant, Fast & Fast.
For the respondent, David M. Litwin and Moe A. Litwin.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Bodine, Heher,' Perskie, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None.