Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey

McMahon v. American Railway Express Company

McMahon v. Am. Ry. Express Co., 105 N.J.L. 494 (N.J. 1929)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction
New Jersey
Date
1929-02-04
Topic
general

Pee Cueiam. The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Supreme Court. For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Teenchaed, Kalisch, Katzenbach, Lloyd, White, Van Buskiebk, McG-lennon, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, JJ. 12. For reversal — None.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed McMahon v. American Railway Express Company. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Pee Cueiam.

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

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Teenchaed, Kalisch, Katzenbach, Lloyd, White, Van Buskiebk, McG-lennon, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.