Tams v. Abrams, 185 A. 521 (1936).
Tams v. Abrams, 185 A. 521 (1936). Book View Copy Cite
Peggy Tams, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Raymond E. Tams, Deceased, Complainant-Respondent,
v.
Morton Abrams, Ramos & Company, Incorporated, a New Jersey Corporation, and Paramount Investment Corporation, a New Jersey Corporation, Defendants-Appellants
Messrs. Schotland Schotland , for the defendant-appellant Paramount Investment Corporation. Messrs. Osborne, Cornish Scheck and Mr. Ervin S. Fulop , for the complainant-respondent.
PER CURIAM..
Per Curiam.

The pleadings and proofs in this case have been carefully examined. The conclusions of the vice-chancellor are abundantly supported by the evidence adduced.

The decree is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.