Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1915

Hinchman v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.

Hinchman v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.
Supreme Court of New Jersey · Decided June 14, 1915 · Affirmance, Bergen, Black, Garrison, Kalisch, Minturn, Modification, None, Parker, Reversal, Swayze, Terhune, Trenchard, Vredenburgh, White, Williams
84 N.J. Eq. 504; 93 A. 1085; 1915 N.J. LEXIS 369

Hinchman v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

So far as the decree appealed from provides for the appointment of a receiver, and the sequestration of the property of appellant company located within the State of New Jersey,-we think it cannot be sustained. The remaining portions of the decree are justified by the facts proved; and to that extent the decree will be affirmed.

The respondent is entitled to costs.

For affirmance — None. For reversal — None. For modification — The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Vredenburgh, White, Terhune, Williams — 13.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑