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

MATTHEWS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. ANTONIO RANALLO, RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, HEHER, PERSKIE, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, COLE, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTHEWS CONSTRUCTION CO. v. RANALLO
(Oct 2, 1936)