Charney v. Cohen

95 N.J.L. 538 | N.J. | 1921

Pee Cuejam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Minturn in the-Supreme Court.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Swayzb, Trenchard, PARKER, Bergen, Kaliscit, KatzeNBAoh, White, Heppen-HEIMER, WILLIAMS,’ TAYLOR, GARDNER, AOKERSON, JJ. 13. For reversal — None.