Van Winkle v. Steneck
Marshall Van Winkle, Complainant-Respondent, v. Henry C. Steneck and George W. Steneck, Defendants-Appellants; John J. Fallon, Seaboard Trust Company and Fred A. Seide, Defendants-Respondents
Van Winkle v. Steneck, 192 A. 241 (N.J. 1937)
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
We agree with the conclusions reached by the court below and the decree appealed from is affirmed.
For affirmance — Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Cole, JJ. 14.
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 ⓘ
Most recent
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.