Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey
Eliasberg v. Standard Oil Co.
12 N.J. 467
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of New Jersey
- Jurisdiction
- New Jersey
- Date
- 1953-06-15
- Topic
- litigation
Per Curiam. The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Ereund in the court below. For affirmance — Chief Justice Vandeebilt, and Justices Hehee, Oliphant, Wachenfeld, Burling, Jacobs and Brennan — 7. For reversal — None.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Eliasberg v. Standard Oil Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 1 opinion
JAY ELIASBERG, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
STANDARD OIL COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Argued June 8, 1953. Decided June 15, 1953.Mr. Nathan H. Gates of the New York bar argued the cause for the appellant (Messrs. Osborne, Cornish & Scheck, attorneys; Mr. Emanuel P. Scheck, Mr. Stanley L. Kaufman of the New York bar and Mr. Joshua Peterfreund of the New York bar, on the brief).
Mr. Josiah Stryker argued the cause for the respondent (Messrs. Stryker, Tams & Horner, attorneys; Mr. John W. Davis of the New York bar, Mr. George A. Brownell of the New York bar and Mr. Stuart Marks of the New York bar, on the brief).
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Freund in the court below.
For affirmance Chief Justice VANDERBILT, and Justices HEHER, OLIPHANT, WACHENFELD, BURLING, JACOBS and BRENNAN 7.
For reversal None.