Legal Opinion

Hartsfield v. Fantini

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 27, 1997PublishedCited by 57 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

GARIBALDI, J.

In this appeal, as in Wallace v. JFK Hartwyck, 149 N.J. 605, 695 A.2d 257 (1997), also decided today, the Court must determine whether an attorney, who fails to appeal an arbitration decision within the thirty-day filing deadline, may file a nunc pro tunc motion for a trial de novo. Specifically, we address whether an attorney’s failure to supervise his secretary and review his diary constitutes “extraordinary circumstances,” permitting relaxation of the thirty-day rule.

I

On January 11,1991, plaintiff, Mary Hartsfield, was driving her ear…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Baumann v. MarinaroSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  2. Pybas v. PaolinoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1994
  3. In Re T.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
  4. Wallace v. JFK Hartwyck at Oak Tree, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
  5. Mazakas v. WrayNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985

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

3Cited by57 opinions

  1. Robin Chamberlain v. Vincent C. Giampapa, M.D., Individually and Dba Plastic Surgery Center InternationaleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
  2. Alan J. Cornblatt, PA v. BarowSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
  3. Jersey Central Power & Light Co. v. Melcar Utility Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
  4. Zamft v. CornellNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1998
  5. Barreiro v. MoraisNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999

52 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