TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Keegle v. County of Hudson

Joseph Keegle, Appellant, v. County of Hudson, Respondent

Keegle v. Cnty. of Hudson, 130 A. 919 (N.J. 1925)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 19, 1925
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
130 A. 919102 N.J.L. 2191925 N.J. LEXIS 317
Cited by 3

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for tiie reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, McGlennon, Kays, 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 3 cases

View all citing references →
1955: 11956: 219552026peak 1956 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Winne v. County of Bergen121 A.2d 733 (N.J. 1956)
  2. Rozmierski v. City of Newark125 A.2d 747 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1956)
  3. De Marco v. BD., CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS, BERGEN CTY.115 A.2d 635 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1955)

Most recent

  1. Rozmierski v. City of Newark125 A.2d 747 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1956)
  2. Winne v. County of Bergen121 A.2d 733 (N.J. 1956)
  3. De Marco v. BD., CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS, BERGEN CTY.115 A.2d 635 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1955)

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list