Rosenfeld v. Roebling Coal Co., Inc., 5 A.2d 695 (N.J. 1939). · Go Syfert
Search
Rosenfeld v. Roebling Coal Co., Inc., 5 A.2d 695 (N.J. 1939). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Joseph P. Rosenfeld, Complainant-Appellant,
v.
Roebling Coal Co., Inc., a Corporation of New York, Et Al., Defendants-Respondents
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Apr 21, 1939.
5 A.2d 695
1939 N.J. LEXIS 659
Mr. Abraham M. Herman , for the complainant-appellant. Mr. Charles C. Pilgrim , for the defendants-respondents.
PER CURIAM..
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
Per Curiam.

We have carefully examined the record and the arguments of counsel in this cause. The conclusion of the learned vice-chancellor, who dismissed the complainant’s hill seeking a receiver for the defendant company, was in all respects proper, because the bill lacked proofs and was insufficient.

The decree of dismissal is, therefore, affirmed.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chief-Justice, Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Porter, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Hague, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.