110 A.2d 54
Supreme Court of New Jersey.Argued December 6, 1954 —
Decided December 13, 1954.
Appeal from the Superior Court, Chancery Division.
Mr. Harrison F. Durand argued the cause for the appellants, cross-respondents (Mr. Doane Twombly of counsel).
Mr. Frederick K. Hopkins argued the cause for the respondents, cross-appellants (Messrs. Hopkins, Vorburger and Dickson, attorneys).
Mr. Ronald A. Gulick argued the cause for the respondents.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the Chancery Division of the Superior Court is affirmed as to the matters appealed from
Page 41
for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed in that court by Judge Ewart and reported at 33 N.J. Super. 242.
We find no merit in the cross-appeal from the award of counsel fees. The trustees raised the question of the construction of the will in their complaint and there was clearly reasonable doubt as to its meaning. We affirm the trial court’s decision on this point.
For affirmance — Chief Justice VANDERBILT, and Justices HEHER, OLIPHANT, WACHENFELD, BURLING, JACOBS and BRENNAN — 7.
For reversal — None.
64 N.J.L. 99 THE STATE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR v. ALBERT J. ACKERMAN, DEFENDANT BELOW, PLAINTIFF…
SYLLABUS (This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court.? It has been…
APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION (January 25, 2017) SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION, ESSEX COUNTY…
APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, ESSEX COUNTY STATE OF NEW JERSEY,…
811 A.2d 909 IN THE MATTER OF MARTIN C. LATINSKY, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.Supreme Court…
669 A.2d 1378 GLORIA YUN, ADMINISTRATOR AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE OF CHANG HAK YUN,…