Legal Opinion

Cox v. Sears Roebuck & Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided September 15, 1994PublishedCited by 360 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

CLIFFORD, J.

This appeal, here as of right because of a dissent in the Appellate Division, R. 2:2-l(a)(2), presents important questions under the Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to -20 (the Act). William Cox contracted with defendant for renovations to the kitchen of his home. (Inasmuch as William Cox died after the institution of this suit, his son, as executor of his father’s estate, has been substituted as plaintiff. References to “plaintiff’ in this opinion, however, are to the original plaintiff, William Cox.) Dissatisfied with the work,…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Kugler v. RomainSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1971
  2. Meshinsky v. Nichols Yacht Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
  3. Tessmar v. GrosnerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1957
  4. Berg v. Reaction Motors DivisionSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1962
  5. Fenwick v. Kay American Jeep, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1977

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

3Cited by360 opinions

  1. Frederico v. Home DepotCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
  2. Gennari v. Weichert Co. RealtorsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
  3. Bosland v. Warnock Dodge, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2009
  4. Thiedemann v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLCSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  5. Anthony D'agostino v. Ricardo Maldonado (068940)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013

355 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