Citation Numbers: 157 A.2d 505, 31 N.J. 385
Judges: Per Curiam
Filed Date: 1/25/1960
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 8/25/2023
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Mr. Elmer J. Bennett argued the cause for the appellant (Messrs. Carpenter, Bennett and Morrissey, attorneys; Mr. Milton A. Dauber, on the brief).
Mr. Samuel M. Lane, of the New York bar, and Mr. Donald B. Kipp argued the cause for the respondent (Messrs. Pitney, Hardin and Ward, attorneys; Mr. Robert P. Hazlehurst, Jr., on the brief).
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the Appellate Division, 56 N.J. Super. 589, is affirmed essentially for the reasons stated in its opinion. We add that we cannot find in the record sufficient evidence of specifically identifiable property subject to escheat or custody under the statutes, N.J.S. 2A:37-13 et seq., or N.J.S. 2A:37-29 et seq.
For affirmance Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, and Justices BURLING, JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL and SCHETTINO 7.
For reversal None.
State v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co. , 56 N.J. Super. 589 ( 1959 )
Louisiana Health Service and Indemnity Co. v. McNamara , 561 So. 2d 712 ( 1990 )
North Carolina State Treasurer v. City of Asheville , 61 N.C. App. 140 ( 1983 )
STATE BY FURMAN v. Elizabethtown Water Co. , 40 N.J. 280 ( 1963 )
Liptak v. Rite Aid, Inc. , 289 N.J. Super. 199 ( 1996 )
State v. Elsinore Shore Associates , 249 N.J. Super. 403 ( 1991 )
Rance v. SPERRY AND HUTCHINSON COMPANY , 410 P.2d 859 ( 1965 )