TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Dent v. Butterworth-Judson Corp.

GEORGE DENT v. BUTTERWORTH-JUDSON CORPORATION

Dent v. Butterworth-Judson Corp., 116 A. 923 (N.J. 1922)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 9, 1922
Judges
Pee
Citations
116 A. 92397 N.J.L. 3221922 N.J. LEXIS 194

Opinion of the Court — Pee

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Pee Curiam.

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

For affirmance — The Ceiaxoellor, Chief Justice, Trexchard, Bergex, Mixturx, Kalisch, Katzexbach, Williams, Gardxer, Ackersox, Yax Busktrk, JJ. 11.

For reversal — Xone.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1963: 119632026peak 1963 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Wright v. Purepac Corp.196 A.2d 695 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1963)

Most recent

  1. Wright v. Purepac Corp.196 A.2d 695 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1963)

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