Legal Opinion
Granowitz v. Vanvickle
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided March 5, 1993PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
264 N.J. Super. 440 (1993)
624 A.2d 1047
ELISA S. GRANOWITZ, AND LEON GRANOWITZ, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
JAMES R. VANVICKLE, AND ANN VANVICKLE, DEFENDANTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division (Civil), Union County.
March 5, 1993.
Monica C. Kowalski, for plaintiffs (Leonard & Leonard, attorneys).
Philip L. Geibel, for defendants (Isaacson, Dougherty & Zirulnik, attorneys).
MENZA, J.S.C.
The defendants move for summary judgment on the basis that the plaintiff has failed to meet the verbal threshold.
The novel question presented is whether a psychiatric disorder may constitute a serious injury within the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Berman v. AllanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
- Oswin v. ShawSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
- Falzone v. BuschSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
- Saunderlin v. E.I. Dupont Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1986
- Eyrich for Eyrich v. DamNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Dyszel v. MarksCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Cureton v. EleyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1996
- H.K.S. VS. PAUL M. KENSEY (L-0531-17, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2020
- Rose Dyszel and Robert Dyszel, H/w, Michele Dyszel and Michael Dyszel, H/w v. Rosie Marks, Defendant/third-Party v. Tim's Auto Service Tim Doe, Third-Party Michele Dyszel, Daniel Tumolo and Leslie Tumolo, H/w v. Andrew Brogan, IIICourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993