Benton v. City of Elizabeth
THOMAS H. BENTON, IN ERROR v. CITY OF ELIZABETH, IN ERROR
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
Understanding that the majority opinion of the Supreme Court does not affirm a right in the National Transit Company to operate a pipe line in this state, but, in absence of any- question upon that point, merely assumes, for the purpose of reaching the points mooted, that the company named has authority from this state to lay a pipe line, we vote to affirm the judgment below for the reasons stated in that opinion.
. For affirmance—The Chancellor, Depue, Lippincott, Adams, Bogert, ’Hendrickson, Nixon. 7.
For reversal—Gummere, Ludlow, Vredenburgh. 3.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
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.