Legal Opinion
In Re Richardson
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided January 25, 1960PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Jacobs, J.
The Mercer County Court determined that in view of the attorney-client privilege the respondent Erederick E. Richardson could not be compelled to divulge who paid the fees for the legal services rendered by him in his professional representation of Russell J. Pfitzinger; accordingly, it discharged the order to show cause which the Attorney General had obtained and the appellants duly filed their notice of appeal to the Appellate Division. We certified the appeal while it was pending there.
Mr. Pfitzinger, a material inspector in the State…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Clark v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Penfield Co. v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. PapeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Mauch v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
- People ex rel. Vogelstein v. Warden of the County JailNew York Supreme Court · 1934
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Baird v. KoernerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- In Re Myron FarberSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
- Fellerman v. BradleySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
- State v. FeasterSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
- Wimberly v. PatersonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.