Legal Opinion

Feuchtbaum v. Constantini

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided July 21, 1971No. A-115; A-123PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Wehíteaub, C. J.

These actions arise out of automobile accidents and have the common feature that the defendant, a resident of our State at the time of the occurrence, thereafter disappeared and could not be served with process by any of the usual modes of service. Hence plaintiffs asked leave to make service another way. In LaGreca v. Hars, plaintiff sought to serve defendant by service on defendant’s insurance carrier. The trial court denied the application. In Feuchtbaum v. Constantini and Magahan v. Erspamer, there being no insurance coverage,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Schroeder v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Walker v. City of HutchinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1956

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. State v. JacksonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2018
  2. Krueger v. WilliamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  3. U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for TheNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2016
  4. Hartwell v. MarquezWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Felicetta v. COMMERCIAL UNION INS. CO.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1971

31 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