Legal Opinion
Bishop v. Harski
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided May 13, 1983PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
191 N.J. Super. 109 (1983)
465 A.2d 577
MICHAEL BISHOP AND JOYCE BISHOP, HUSBAND AND WIFE, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
MARYANN HARSKI AND TADEUSZ HARSKI, DEFENDANTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division Camden County.
Decided May 13, 1983.
Michael A. Kaplan for plaintiffs (Tomar, Parks, Seliger, Simonoff & Adourian, attorneys).
Robert M. Kaplan for defendants (Yampell & Cosentino, attorneys).
ROSSETTI, J.S.C.
This case presents the novel question of whether the concept of additur/remittitur may be employed by a trial court on a motion for new trial following the liability verdict in a jurisdiction where…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
- Dolson v. AnastasiaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1969
- Baxter v. Fairmont Food Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1977
- Trentacost v. BrusselSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
- Fisch v. MangerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1957
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- D'Ercole Sales, Inc. v. Fruehauf Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985
- Fertile v. St. Michael's Medical CenterSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
- Kurak v. A.P. Green Refractories Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997
- Cotrona v. Johnson & Wales CollegeSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1985
- Tronolone v. PalmerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.