Legal Opinion

DiMisa v. Acquaviva

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided April 14, 2009No. A-35 September Term 2008Published

1Opinion of the Court 1

969 A.2d 1091 (2009)

198 N.J. 547

Frank DiMISA, Judy Morris, Beth Thomas-Edwards, each individually and as partners and on behalf of 61 East Main St., a general partnership, Plaintiffs-Respondents,

v.

Ronald ACQUAVIVA, Defendant, and

R.E. Investors Ltd., Inc. and Christopher Acquaviva, Defendants-Appellants.

A-35 September Term 2008

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued January 21, 2009.

Decided April 14, 2009.

Eliot L. Greenberg, New York City, argued the cause for appellants (Rosner Nocera & Ragone, attorneys).

John J. Pribish, Princeton, argued the cause for respondents (Blank Rome, attorneys).

2Opinion of the Court · LongJustice Long

At issue…

Also in this document: Dissent.

3Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State, Dept. of Environ. Protect. v. Ventron Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
  2. Right to Choose v. ByrneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
  3. Gerhardt v. Continental InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1966
  4. In Re Estate of LashSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
  5. Jugan v. FriedmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1994

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API