Opinion · Njlaw New Jersey

ROWAN v. GENERAL CASUALTY AND SURETY CO., 103 N.J.L. 713 (1927)

ADELE ROWAN, RESPONDENT, v. Gen. Cas. & Sur. Co., APPELLANT., 137 A. 437 (Ct. Err. & App. 1927)

Type: Opinion
Court: Njlaw New Jersey
Jurisdiction: Njlaw
Date: 1927-05-16
Topic: general

ROWAN v. GENERAL CASUALTY AND SURETY CO., 103 N.J.L. 713 (1927) 137 A. 437 ADELE ROWAN, RESPONDENT, v. GENERAL CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, APPELLANT.Court of Errors and Appeals.Submitted February 11, 1927 — Decided May 16, 1927. On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose per curiam is printed in 4 N.J. Mis.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed ROWAN v. GENERAL CASUALTY AND SURETY CO., 103 N.J.L. 713 (1927). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

ROWAN v. GENERAL CASUALTY AND SURETY CO.,103 N.J.L. 713(1927)

137 A. 437

ADELE ROWAN, RESPONDENT, v. GENERAL CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, APPELLANT.

Court of Errors and Appeals.

Submitted February 11, 1927 —

Decided May 16, 1927.

On appeal from the Supreme Court, whoseper curiamis printed in4 N.J. Mis. R. 926.

For the respondent,Paul M. Salsburg.

For the appellant,William Charlton.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Supreme Court.For affirmance— THE CHANCELLOR, TRENCHARD, PARKER, BLACK, KATZENBACH, LLOYD, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, JJ. 11.For reversal— None.