Case Name: LOUIS WATERMAN ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. MAX TAUB ET AL., APPELLANTS
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1926-02-01
Citations: 102 N.J.L. 472
Docket Number: 
Parties: LOUIS WATERMAN ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. MAX TAUB ET AL., APPELLANTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 102
Pages: 472–472

Head Matter:
LOUIS WATERMAN ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. MAX TAUB ET AL., APPELLANTS.
Submitted October 29, 1925
Decided February 1, 1926.
For the respondents, Morris Umansky.
For the appellants, Tiffany, Brugler & Wittreich.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, McGlennon, Kays, Hetfield, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.