Legal Opinion
Pollino v. Pollino
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided February 24, 1956PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
39 N.J. Super. 294 (1956)
121 A.2d 62
ROY POLLINO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DAGMAR POLLINO, DEFENDANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division.
Decided February 24, 1956.
Messrs. Wilentz, Goldman, Spitzer & Sills (Mr. Warren Wilentz, appearing), attorneys for plaintiff.
Mr. David I. Stepacoff, attorney for defendant.
MARIANO, J.S.C.
Plaintiff, Roy Pollino, filed a complaint for divorce against his wife, Dagmar Pollino, alleging adultery commencing in August of 1953 and running to January 8, 1954. Defendant's answer denied the alleged adultery and, as a separate defense, stated that plaintiff had been…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Vulcan Detinning Co. v. American Can Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1907
- A. Hollander & Son, Inc. v. Imperial Fur Blending Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1949
- Neubeck v. NeubeckSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1922
- Primeau v. GranfieldCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1911
- Langley v. DevlinWashington Supreme Court · 1917
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hageman v. 28 Glen Park Assoc., L.L.C.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2008