From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Venino v. Naegele

Court of Errors and Appeals
Oct 27, 1926
134 A. 920 (N.J. 1926)

Opinion

Decided October 27th, 1926.

On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Bentley, whose opinion is reported in 99 N.J. Eq. 183.

Mr. J. Emil Walscheid, for the appellant.

Mr. Robert Carey, for the respondents.


The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the court below.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, MINTURN, KALISCH, BLACK, KATZENBACH, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, JJ. 15.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

Venino v. Naegele

Court of Errors and Appeals
Oct 27, 1926
134 A. 920 (N.J. 1926)
Case details for

Venino v. Naegele

Case Details

Full title:OTTO VENINO, JR., appellant, v. AUGUST NAEGELE et al., respondents

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Oct 27, 1926

Citations

134 A. 920 (N.J. 1926)
134 A. 920

Citing Cases

Stuart Wood, Inc., v. Palisades, c., Corp.

" Defendant says that the agreement being temporary, complainant can have no relief in this suit, citing such…

Levine v. Lafayette Building Corp.

Holding, as we do, that the paper is on its face incomplete, and contemplates later completion by treaty and…