Legal Opinion

Kronmiller v. Caruso

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided October 13, 1959PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

57 N.J. Super. 331 (1959)

154 A.2d 739

GEORGE KRONMILLER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

v.

MARY LOU CARUSO AND ROBERT W. SUTHERLAND, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued October 5, 1959.

Decided October 13, 1959.

Before Judges CONFORD, FOLEY and SCHALICK.

Mr. Robert M. Graham argued the cause for defendants-appellants (Messrs. Ferrara and Guez, attorneys).

Mr. Paul J. O'Neill argued the cause for plaintiff-respondent.

The opinion of the court was delivered by CONFORD, J.A.D.

This case comes before us on an agreed statement of facts pursuant to R.R. 1:6-3 and R.R. 2:6.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Evtush v. the Hudson Bus Transportation Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1951
  2. Interchemical Corp. v. Uncas Printing & Fin. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
  3. Abbatemarco v. ColtonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Battershell v. Bowman Dairy Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1961
  2. Webber v. McCormickNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1960
  3. Falcone v. NJ Bell Tel. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
  4. Joseph Toker, Inc. v. CohenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
  5. Reilly v. SPIEGELHALTERNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API