134 A. 919
Court of Errors and Appeals.Submitted May 28, 1926 —
Decided October 18, 1926.
On error to the Supreme Court, whose per curiam is printed i 4 N.J. Mis. R. 195.
For the plaintiff in error, James E. Hildreth and Henry M. Hartmann.
For the defendant in error, William H. Campbell, Jr.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the court below.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, MINTURN, BLACK, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, McGLENNON, JJ. 7.
For reversal — WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, JJ. 5.
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,…