Rahm v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.
117 N.J.L. 149
| N.J. | 1936|
Check TreatmentThe 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, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, PERSKIE, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None. *Page 150
