neutral
Cited (no substantive treatment)
published
0.2 score
Cited for
No citing cases on record.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Maurice Teitelbaum, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Mas Sachusetts Accident Company, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant; Maurice Teitelbaum, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Massachusetts Accident Company, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant
v.
Mas Sachusetts Accident Company, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant; Maurice Teitelbaum, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Massachusetts Accident Company, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
May 14, 1936.
Published opinion
For the defendant-appellant, Herman E. Dultz.
For the plaintiff-respondent, Kanter Kanter ( Charles Kanter ).
PER CURIAM..
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
Pee Cueiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court. It should, however, be noted that the plaintiff below admitted that he treated about four patients a week and not four patients a day as inadvertently stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hetfield, Deae, Wells, WolfsKeil, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None.