Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

MICHAEL CAPPADONNA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. PASSAIC MOTORS, INC.,PROSECUTOR-RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

The questions are chiefly on the facts, and since there is supporting proof we are bound as to them by the Supreme Court decision. Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co., 129 N.J.L. 399; Suburban Land Improvement Co. v. Vailsburgh, 68 Id. 311. In so far as the dispute is of law we affirm, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bodine filed in the Supreme Court.

The judgment below is affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, DONGES, COLIE, EASTWOOD, BURLING, JACOBS, WELLS, DILL, FREUND, McLEAN, SCHETTINO, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CAPPADONNA v. PASSAIC MOTORS, INC
(Sep 3, 1948)