Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey
Haring v. State
24 Vroom 664
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of New Jersey
- Jurisdiction
- New Jersey
- Date
- 1891-06-15
- Topic
- general
Per Curiam. We agree with the opinion of the Supreme Court except so far as it construes the act of March 30th, 1887. It is unnecessary to pass upon that part of the opinion, because we find the act to be unconstitutional. Let the judgment below be affirmed. .For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Mague, Reed, Scudder, Brown, Clement, Smith, Whitaker. 9. For reversal—None.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Haring v. State. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 4 opinions
We agree with the opinion of the Supreme Court except so far as it construes the act of March 30th, 1887. It is unnecessary to pass upon that part of the opinion, because we find the act to be unconstitutional.
Let the judgment below be affirmed.
.For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Mague, Reed, Scudder, Brown, Clement, Smith, Whitaker. 9.
For reversal—None.