
    JOHN F. DWYER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. LEHIGH VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    Submitted February 11, 1944
    Decided April 13, 1944.
    For the plaintiff-respondent, Hoberman d Hoberman (Sol Hoberman, of counsel).
    For the defendant-appellant, Collins & Corbin (Edward Markley and Charles W. Broadhurst, of counsel).
   Per Curiam.

The judgment under review should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Chief Justice Brogan, reported in 131 N. J. L. 1, reserving, however, the question of liability udder the doctrine of the maritime law for maintenance and cure of the plaintiff as a seaman. The case was not decided by the jury on that theory, and it is not necessary to pass upon that phase of the case.

The judgment is affirmed.

For affirmance — Tiie Chancellor, Parker, Case, Donges, Iíeher, Persiste, Porter, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Thompson, Dill, JJ. 13.

For reversed — None.  