Legal Opinion
Schlussel v. Emmanuel Roth Co.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided February 7, 1994PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
270 N.J. Super. 628 (1994)
637 A.2d 944
ABRAHAM SCHLUSSEL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT/CROSS-RESPONDENT,
v.
EMMANUEL ROTH CO., K/N/A ERC LIQUIDATING CORP., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, DEFENDANT, AND NOVTEX CORPORATION, A NEW YORK CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT/CROSS-APPELLANT, AND DANIEL BIRD, JOHN CARPENTER AND CARL FUNKE, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Argued December 13, 1993.
Decided February 7, 1994.
Before Judges PETRELLA, CONLEY and VILLANUEVA.
David O. Marcus argued the cause for appellant-cross-respondent (Shapiro & Shapiro, attorneys; Mr. Marcus and Robert…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Oldden v. Tonto Realty CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Fischer v. Rio Tire Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1933
- Starman v. John Wolfe, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1973
- Apex Leasing Co. v. LitkeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Seitz v. Mark-O-Lite Sign Contractors, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ed Peters Jewelry Co. v. C & J Jewelry Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997
- Ed Peters v. C & J JewelryCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997