From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Rommel

Court of Errors and Appeals
Sep 9, 1925
130 A. 920 (N.J. 1925)

Opinion

Submitted May 29, 1925 —

Decided September 9, 1925.

On error to the Supreme Court, whose per curiam is printed in 3 N.J. Mis. R. 204.

For the plaintiff in error, Lindabury Steelman ( Harry A. Augenblick, of counsel).

For the defendant in error, John O. Bigelow, prosecutor of the pleas.


The judgment under review will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — TRENCHARD, KALISCH, BLACK, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, WHITE, GARDNER, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, JJ. 10.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

State v. Rommel

Court of Errors and Appeals
Sep 9, 1925
130 A. 920 (N.J. 1925)
Case details for

State v. Rommel

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. LOUIS ROMMEL, PLAINTIFF IN…

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Sep 9, 1925

Citations

130 A. 920 (N.J. 1925)
102 N.J.L. 226