Rahm v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.
Rahm v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.
187 A. 371; 117 N.J.L. 149; 1936 N.J. LEXIS 334
Opinion of the Court
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered per curiam in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.