Legal Opinion

Yeck v. Rietzke

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided December 21, 1954PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

33 N.J. Super. 371 (1954)

110 A.2d 321

ANTHONY J. YECK, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v.

WALTER RIETZKE, HELEN RIETZKE, HIS WIFE, AND BARBARA LUDI, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued December 13, 1954.

Decided December 21, 1954.

Before Judges CLAPP, JAYNE and FRANCIS.

Mr. Emil J. Hoos argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. Alexander Levchuk argued the cause for respondents (Messrs. Levchuk and Pappa, attorneys).

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

Perceptibly the remedy to be afforded in response to the present appeal is the substitution of a judgment…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Haughwout & Pomeroy v. MurphySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1871
  2. Temple v. Clinton Trust CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1948
  3. Cohen v. CohenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1941
  4. Mesce v. GradoneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1948
  5. Hopper v. GurtmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1941

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fire Guard Sprinkler Corp. v. ManolioNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1979
  2. Matter of New Woodbridge Barrel & Drum Co., Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · 1988
  3. Fire Guard Sprinkler Corp. v. ManolioNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API