Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1909

Rodman v. Manganese Steel Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Decided March 1, 1909 · Affirmance, Bergen, Bogert, Dill, Garrison, Gray, Minturn, None, Parker, Reed, Reversal, Swayze, Trenchard, Vredenburgi, Vroom, Yoorhees

75 N.J. Eq. 295; 5 Buchanan 295; 72 A. 963; 1909 N.J. LEXIS 287

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Healey v. Walbrook Park Co. (New Jersey Court of Chancery 1935)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The order is affirmed for the reasons given by Vice-Chancellor Howell.

The suggestion that the decree of insolvency and for an injunction in statutory proceedings against an insolvent corporation is a final decree was not necessary for the decision of the cause. It seems to be in conflict with the opinion expressed for this court by Mr. Justice Van Syckel in Franklin Electric Light Co. v. Fort Wayne Electric Corporation, 58 N. J. Eg. (13 Dick.) 543. Whether the explanation of that opinion contained in Vice-Chancellor Stevenson’s opinion in Pierce v. Old Dominion Copper Mining and Smelting Co., 58 Atl. Rep. 319 (at p. 326), is correct or not is a question we need not now consider.

*296

For affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Reed, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Yoorhees, Minturn, Bogert, Vredenburgi-i, Vroom, Gray, Dill—14. For reversal—None.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.