Legal Opinion
Bosch v. Hain
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided February 11, 1982PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
184 N.J. Super. 204 (1982)
445 A.2d 465
BILLY BOSCH AND AIDA RIVERA, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
ISAAC AND GENONEA HAIN, THE CITY OF HOBOKEN, STATE OF NEW JERSEY, JOHN A. DOE, JOHN B. DOE, DEFENDANTS. PLACEDO SOTO, AS ADMINISTRATRIX AD PROSEQUENDUM FOR THE HEIRS-AT-LAW OF NICHOLAS TORRES ET AL., PLAINTIFF,
v.
ISAAC HAIN AND GENOVEA HAIN, DEFENDANTS. CETERAM DREPAUL, AS ADMINISTRATRIX AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATES OF JACOB DREPAUL ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CITY OF HOBOKEN, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division Hudson County.
Decided February 11, 1982.
Frederick J. Dennehy…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Morris v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Malloy v. StateSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
- Shakespeare v. City of PasadenaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Wuethrich v. DeliaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1978
- Elson v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Rochinsky v. State of NJ, Dept. of Transp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
- Bombace v. City of NewarkSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1991
- Marley v. Palmyra Bor.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1983
- Pico v. StateSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1989
- Kenney v. Scientific, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.