State v. United Cork Companies
| Decision Date | 10 January 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 83.,83. |
| Citation | 176 A. 142 |
| Parties | The State, The BOARD OF HEALTH OF THE TOWNSHIP OF LYNDHURST, Respondent v. UNITED CORK COMPANIES, Appellant. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Court of Chancery.
McCarter & English, of Newark, for appellant.
Leo F. Reilly, of Lyndhurst, for respondent.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice Chancellor Lewis, reported in 116 N. J. Eq. 4,172 A. 347.
For affirmance: The CHIEF JUSTICE, Justices LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, and PERSKIE, and Judges VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR and WELLS—12.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
State v. Mundet Cork Corp.
... ... 2 of the Ringelman Smoke Chart, as published by the United States Bureau of Mines, Or which is so dense as to be dimly seen through at the point of emission into the external air from any stack or open fire, ... Simeral, who largely related his testimony to plants of other companies with different equipment and at different locations, was offered an an expert witness and testified that there is no way of eliminating All odors ... ...
-
Newmark v. Gimbel's Inc.
... ... Paramus Corporation, a corporation of the State of ... New Jersey, Defendants-Appellants ... Supreme Court of New ... State Board of Health of Township of Lyndhurst v. United Cork Co., 116 N.J.Eq. 4, 12, 172 A. 347 (Ch.Div.), aff'd, 117 N.J.Eq. 437, ... ...
-
State ex rel. Board of Health of Saddle Brook Tp. v. Sommers Rendering Co.
... ... Board of Health of Lyndhurst v. United Cork Co., 116 N.J.Eq. 4, 172 A. 347 (Ch.1934), affirmed 117 N.J.Eq. 437, 176 A. 142 (E. & A.1935); ... ...