State v. Gallo
State of New Jersey, Defendant in Error, v. Frank Gallo, Plaintiff in Error
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
The judgment under review is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Chief Justice Brogan for the Supreme Court.
Plaintiff in error argues that the conclusion of the Supreme Court, as stated in its opinion, that Exhibit S-16 was received in evidence without objection is not supported by the record. The record is not clear, but we conclude that the exhibit was received over the objection of counsel for the plaintiff in-error and that exception to its admission was recorded. However, the reasoning of the opinion as to Exhibit S-14 applies equally to Exhibit S-16, and we think- there was no error in the trial court’s ruling.
The judgment under review is affirmed.
For affirmance —The Chancellor, Parker, Bodine, Donges, Perskie, Porter, Dear, Wells, Hague, Thompson, JJ. 10.
For reversal —Colie, J. 1.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 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.