Legal Opinion
Amsterdam v. De Paul
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided November 6, 1961PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
70 N.J. Super. 196 (1961)
175 A.2d 219
ROBERT AMSTERDAM AND ROSE HOLDER, PARTNERS T/A EASTERN SALES FINANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS DE PAUL, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Argued October 23, 1961.
Decided November 6, 1961.
Before Judges GAULKIN, KILKENNY and HERBERT.
Mr. Monroe Jay Lustbader argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Lustbader & Lustbader, attorneys; Mr. Irving Silverman, on the brief).
No appearance for the respondent.
The opinion of the court was delivered by KILKENNY, J.A.D.
Plaintiff holder of a negotiable promissory note sued the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Trambly v. RicardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Whipple v. . Brown Brothers Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Cline v. GuthrieIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Bancredit, Inc. v. BetheaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
- McDonald v. Central RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1916
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Young v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997
- Schaeffer v. United Bank & Trust Co.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1976