Legal Opinion

Burleigh v. Sartain

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided January 10, 1935Published

1Per curiam

The action of the lower court is reviewable on appeal. Hanford v. Duchaslel, 87 N. J. L. 205; Sweeney v. Miner, 88 Id. 361; Jaudel v. Schoelzke, 95 Id. 171.

The rule under review will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of Mr. Justice Trenehard, supra. The case of Potter v. Cook, cited by him, not being officially reported, it is proper to repeat the citations made in that case, of the New York decisions in Bronson v. Mitchell, 12 Johns. 460; Humphrey v. Cande, 2 Cow. 509, and Milliken v. Selye, 3 Den. 54. The opinion in Kulich v. Kertacy, 12 N. J. Mis. R. 743; 174 All. Rep.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In re BronsonNew York Supreme Court · 1815
  2. Milliken v. SelyeNew York Supreme Court · 1846
  3. Humphrey v. CandeNew York Supreme Court · 1824

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API