Opinion
Submitted October term, 1935.
Decided January 31st, 1936.
The proofs taken below not being presented on this appeal, and there being no indication that if produced they would not sustain the proposition arrived at, the decision of the vice-chancellor is affirmed.
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Lewis, whose opinion is reported in 118 N.J. Eq. 537.
Mr. Warren Dixon, Jr., for the appellant.
Mr. Lloyd G. Beatty, for the respondent Harold J. Marsh, receiver.
Mr. A. Wilberforce Egner and Mr. George H. Rosenstein, for the respondent John Henry Miller.
The printed state of case does not bring up the proofs taken before the receiver and does not disclose that there were no proofs taken. We cannot surmise that the proofs, if produced, would not sustain the proposition that the value of the goods taken were equal to or greater than the preference allowed to the landlord for rent. We therefore affirm for the reasons stated by the vice-chancellor. For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.