Case Name: LONG DOCK COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR; MORRIS AND ESSEX RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR; CENTRAL RAILROAD OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1910-06-20
Citations: 79 N.J.L. 604
Docket Number: 
Parties: LONG DOCK COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR. MORRIS AND ESSEX RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR. CENTRAL RAILROAD OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 79
Pages: 604–604

Head Matter:
LONG DOCK COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR. MORRIS AND ESSEX RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR. CENTRAL RAILROAD OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.
Argued March 7, 1910 —
Decided June 20, 1910.
On error to the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 49 Vroom 44.
For the Long Dock Company, Collins & Corbin.
For tiie Morris and Essex Railroad Company, Edwards & Smith.
For the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, George Holmes.
For the State Board of Assessors, Edmund Wilson, attorney-general .

Opinion:
Per Cueiam.
The judgments under review herein should lie affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Garrison in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chibe Justice, Sway,zb, Trenchard, Parker, Bogert, Yroom, Gray, Dill, Congdon, JJ. 9.
For reversal — Tub, Chancellor, Minturn, J. 2.