Legal Opinion

Republic of China v. Pong-Tsu Mow

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided October 15, 1954Published

1Opinion of the Court

33 N.J. Super. 24 (1954)

108 A.2d 891

REPUBLIC OF CHINA, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,

v.

PONG-TSU MOW, (ALSO KNOWN AS PANG-TSU MOW), DEFENDANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.

Decided October 15, 1954.

Messrs. Stryker, Tams & Horner, attorneys for plaintiffs.

Messrs. Stoffer and Jacobs, attorneys for defendant.

GAULKIN, J.C.C. (temporarily assigned).

This action was begun by a writ of attachment, issued September 14, 1953. The affidavit upon which the writ was issued stated that "the nature and particulars of said cause of action" were that plaintiff had entrusted to defendant Mow and others as its…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. StocktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Adam v. SaengerSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Freeman v. Bee MacHine Co., IncSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. McMaster v. GouldNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  5. Ex Parte Indiana Transportation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API