Case Name: MICHAEL CAPPADONNA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. PASSAIC MOTORS, INC., PROSECUTOR-RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1948-09-03
Citations: 137 N.J.L. 661
Docket Number: 
Parties: MICHAEL CAPPADONNA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. PASSAIC MOTORS, INC., PROSECUTOR-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 137
Pages: 661–661

Head Matter:
MICHAEL CAPPADONNA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. PASSAIC MOTORS, INC., PROSECUTOR-RESPONDENT.
Submitted May 28, 1948
Decided September 3, 1948.
For the defendant-appellant, Aaron J Letter and Dominick De Muro.
For the prosecutor-respondent, Kalisch A Kalisch, (fsidor Kalisch).

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The questions are chiefly on the facts, and since there is supporting proof we are bound as to them by the Supreme Court decision. Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co., 129 N. J. L. 399; Suburban Land Improvement Co. v. Vailsburgh, 68 Id. 311. In so far as the dispute is of law we affirm, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bodine filed in the Supreme Court.
The judgment below is affirmed.
For affirmance — Tub Chancellor, Chief Justice, Donges, Colie, Eastwood, Burling, Jacobs, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, Scttettino, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.