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

GEORGE PALM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PROSECUTOR-APPELLANT, v. EDWARD BAHR,DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court. See, also, Thomas v. Liondale Bleach, Dye and Print Works, 10 N.J. Mis. R. 255.

For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, DILL, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

GEORGE PALM CONSTRUCTION CO. v. BAHR
(Apr 27, 1933)