Ganley v. Kalikman
Teresa Walsh Ganley, Respondent, v. Philip Kalikman, Appellant
Ganley v. Kalikman, 148 A. 917 (N.J. 1930)
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Lloyd in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Black, Campbell, Case, Bodine, Yan Buskirk, Mc-Glennon, Kays, Hetfield, Dear, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.