B. R. Waldron & Sons Co. Inc. v. Milk Control Bd. Of The State Of N. J. .
| Decision Date | 23 March 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 26.,26. |
| Citation | 131 N.J.L. 388,36 A.2d 920 |
| Parties | B. R. WALDRON & SONS CO., Inc., et al., Appellants, v. MILK CONTROL BOARD of the State of N. J., et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court.
Edward W. Currie, of Matawan, for appellants.
Anthony M. Hauck, Jr., of Clinton, and Lloyd C. Fisher, of Flemington, for respondents.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Heher in the Supreme Court, reported at 131 N.J.L. 267, 35 A.2d 27.
For affirmance: The CHANCELLOR, the CHIEF JUSTICE, Justices CASE, BODINE, DONGES, PORTER, and COLIE, and Judges DEAR, WELLS, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, THOMPSON, and DILL-13.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
7 cases
-
Abbotts Dairies, Inc. v. Armstrong
...See also B. R. Waldron & Sons Co. Inc., v Milk Control Board, 131 N.J.L. 267, 270, 35 A.2d 27 (Sup.Ct.1944), affirmed 131 N.J.L. 388, 36 A.2d 920 (E. & A. 1944), where the court used broad language of similar In the light of all of the foregoing we believe that the present Milk Control Act ......
-
Como Farms v. Foran
...Indeed, in B. R. Waldron & Sons Co. v. Milk Control Board, 131 N.J.L. 267, 270, 35 A.2d 27, 29 (Sup.Ct.1944) affirmed 131 N.J.L. 388, 36 A.2d 920 (E. & A. 1944) the former Supreme Court in paraphrasing the 1941 Act interpreted paragraph 22 as imposing 'a duty to consider' the elements enume......
-
State v. Comfort Cab, Inc.
...at 257) Cf. B. R. Waldron & Sons Co., Inc. v. Milk Control Board, 131 N.J.L. 267, 272, 35 A.2d 27 (Sup.Ct.1944), aff'd 131 N.J.L. 388, 36 A.2d 920 (E. & A.1944); N.J. Bell Tel. Co. v. Communications Workers, etc., 5 N.J. 354, 366, 75 A.2d 721 (1950). Does an exemption of coverage for a part......
-
General Elec. Co. v. Packard Bamberger & Co.
...power. Cf. B. R. Waldron & Sons Co., Inc. v. Milk Control Board, 131 N.J.L. 267, 272, 35 A.2d 27 (Sup.Ct.1944), affirmed 131 N.J.L. 388, 36 A.2d 920 (E. & A.1944). The state has been held constitutionally authorized to fix prices for the protection of the public interest, although the state......
Request a trial to view additional results