Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey
Schultz v. Van Doren
Schultz v. Van Doren, 65 N.J. Eq. 764 (N.J. 1903)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of New Jersey
- Jurisdiction
- New Jersey
- Date
- 1903-08-25
- Topic
- general
Per Curiam. The decree appealed from in this case is affirmed, for the reasons set forth in the opinion of Vice-Chancellor Pitney, filed in the court of chancery, and reported in 19 Dick. Ch. Rep. 465. For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Van Syokel, Dixon, Garrison, Port, Hendrickson, Pitney, Swayze, Bogert, Vredenburgi-i, Voori-iees, Vroom, Green- — 13.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Schultz v. Van Doren. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
The decree appealed from in this case is affirmed, for the reasons set forth in the opinion of Vice-Chancellor Pitney, filed in the court of chancery, and reported in 19 Dick. Ch. Rep. 465.
For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Van Syokel, Dixon, Garrison, Port, Hendrickson, Pitney, Swayze, Bogert, Vredenburgi-i, Voori-iees, Vroom, Green- — 13.For reversal — None.