Legal Opinion
Faubel v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided May 21, 1952PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
20 N.J. Super. 116 (1952)
89 A.2d 286
THOMAS LLOYD FAUBEL, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BUCKEYE PIPE LINE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.
Decided May 21, 1952.
Mr. Henry F. Schenk and Mr. Harry Krieger, attorneys for plaintiff (Mr. Harry Krieger, appearing).
Messrs. Herr & Fisher, attorneys for defendant (Mr. Burtis S. Horner, appearing).
COLIE, J.S.C.
This is a motion to dismiss a complaint in lieu of prerogative writ on the ground that the allegations thereof are sham, insufficient in law and fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The complaint…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- City of Newark v. New Jersey Turnpike AuthoritySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1951
- Ryan v. Housing Authority of NewarkSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1940
- Groel v. United Electric Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1905
- Burdett v. Municipal Employees Pension Commission of NewarkSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1942
- Allen v. Francisco Sugar Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Essex County Improvement Authority v. RAR Development AssociatesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999
- Trenton v. LenznerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
- City of Trenton v. LenznerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
- Essex Cty. Imp. Auth. v. Rar Dev.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999