Breitbart v. Lurich
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Per curiam
The judgment under review will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the per curiam of the Supreme Court; except that we call attention to the fact that that court made some observations to show that in the District Court, from which appeal was taken to the Supreme Court, the testimony for the *558plaintiff-respondent was more reasonable of belief than that for the defendant-appellant; while it is settled that upon appeal from the District Court that tribunal’s judgment should be sustained if there be any evidence to support it; ■ and there was such evidence in this case. See Duff v. Prudential…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Miko v. FeldmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1935
- Kroop v. ScalaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1926
- Glickfeld v. VenokurSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1937
- York v. FranksSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1923