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

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. FRANK GALLO, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment under review is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Chief Justice Brogan for the Supreme Court.

Plaintiff in error argues that the conclusion of the Supreme Court, as stated in its opinion, that Exhibit S-16 was received in evidence without objection is not supported by the record. The record is not clear, but we conclude that the exhibit was received over the objection of counsel for the plaintiff in error and that exception to its admission was recorded. However, the reasoning of the opinion as to Exhibit S-14 applies equally to Exhibit S-16, and we think there was no error in the trial court's ruling.

The judgment under review is affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, PARKER, BODINE, DONGES, PERSKIE, PORTER, DEAR, WELLS, HAGUE, THOMPSON, JJ. 10.

For reversal — COLIE, J. 1.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. GALLO
(Sep 18, 1942)