Greenwald v. Geller, 23.

• Decision Date: 17 October 1932
• Docket Number: No. 23.,23.
• Parties: Lona GREENWALD, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Abraham GELLER, Defendant-Appellee.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

162 A. 399

Lona GREENWALD, Plaintiff-Appellant

v. Abraham GELLER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 23.

Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey.

Oct. 17, 1932.

Appeal from Supreme Court.

Plaintiffs appeal from Supreme Court, whose per curiam opinion is reported in 154 A. 737, 9 N. J. Misc. 525.

James F. X. O'Brien, of Newark, for appellant.

Edward A. Markley, of Jersey City, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The facts and questions of law involved are fully stated in the per curiam opinion of the Supreme Court. That opinion makes a slight misstatement of fact, which, however, is quite immaterial to the decision, the statement being that the plaintiff was entering the premises in question, whereas the testimony indicates that she was leaving them. This, of course, makes no difference in the result, as the principles of law applicable are precisely the same.

The judgment will therefore be affirmed for the reasons stated in the per curiam opinion of the Supreme Court.

For affirmance: The CHANCELLOR, Justices PARKER CASE, BODINE, DONGES, and BROGAN, and Judges VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, DEAR, WELLS, and KERNEY.

For reversal: None.