KULIGOWSKI v. McCULLOUGH, 103 N.J.L. 700 (1927)

137 A. 437

MICHAEL T. KULIGOWSKI, APPELLANT, v. WILLIAM E. McCULLOUGH, RESPONDENT.

Court of Errors and Appeals.Argued February 2, 1927 —
Decided May 16, 1927.

The judges being equally divided on the question whether the judgment should be reversed, the judgment is affirmed solely because of such division, which renders any opinion by the court impossible.

On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose per curiam is printed in 4 N.J. Mis. R. 449.

For the appellant, Jacob S. Karkus.

For the respondent, Wight, Wight Golenbock.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment under review herein is affirmed by an equally divided court.

For affirmance — TRENCHARD, LLOYD, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, JJ. 5.

For reversal — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, CAMPBELL, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, JJ. 5.