Borgquist v. Ferris

After the filing and publication of the opinion herein, reported 112 N.J. Eq. 324, counsel for the complainant applied informally for leave to reargue because of its apparent conflict with the decision of this court in McGoldrick v. Grebenstein,108 N.J. Eq. 335, on a point neither argued nor considered in the instant case. The motion having been prompted by one of the governmental departments of this state, it is deemed advisable that I state my views on the question now raised, which is whether or not chapter 41, P.L. 1926 (Cum.Supp. Comp. Stat. p. 454 § 13b), was impliedly repealed by…