Opinion · Njlaw New Jersey

SEFTON v. BD. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 102 N.J.L. 466 (1926)

132 A. 923

Type: Opinion
Court: Njlaw New Jersey
Jurisdiction: Njlaw
Date: 1926-02-01
Topic: general

SEFTON v. BD. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 102 N.J.L. 466 (1926) 132 A. 923 FREDERICK SEFTON, APPELLANT, v. BOARD OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT ETAL., RESPONDENTS.Court of Errors and Appeals.Argued October 28, 1925 — Decided February 1, 1926. On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in101 N.J.L. 294, sub nomine Landell v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed SEFTON v. BD. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 102 N.J.L. 466 (1926). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

SEFTON v. BD. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT,102 N.J.L. 466(1926)

132 A. 923

FREDERICK SEFTON, APPELLANT, v. BOARD OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT ET

AL., RESPONDENTS.

Court of Errors and Appeals.

Argued October 28, 1925 —

Decided February 1, 1926.

On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in101 N.J.L. 294, sub nomineLandell v. State.

For the appellant,Bleakly, Stockwell Burling.

For the respondents,Edward L. KatzenbachandJohn Milton.Page 467

PER CURIAM.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Black in the Supreme Court.For affirmance— THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, PARKER, KATZENBACH, LLOYD, WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, JJ. 11.For reversal— None.