Legal Opinion
Molnar v. Hedden
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided November 17, 1994PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
CLIFFORD, J.
We granted certification, 135 N.J. 303, 639 A.2d 303 (1994), to review the Appellate Division’s determination that the statute of limitations did not bar defendant’s personal-injury counterclaim. The counterclaim arose out of the same accident that formed the basis of plaintiffs complaint, but defendant did not seek leave to file it until after the two-year period of the statute of limitations had run. Having concluded that plaintiffs action was still pending when defendant sought leave to file his counterclaim, the court below held that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Grunwald v. BronkeshSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
- McGlone v. CorbiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1971
- Tackling v. Chrysler Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
- Rivera v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1986
- Cockinos v. GAF Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Prevratil v. MohrSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1996
- Joel v. MorroccoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Licensed Beverage Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1996
- Hein v. GM CONST. CO., INC.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2000
- Everett v. State Farm Indem. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2002
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.