Opinion
Argued October 17, 1934 —
Decided January 10, 1935.
On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 111 N.J.L. 574.
For the appellant, William Rubin.
For the respondents, Tumulty Tumulty.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Lloyd in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — CASE, BODINE, DONGES, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 7.
For reversal — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, HEHER, VAN BUSKIRK, JJ. 4.