Legal Opinion
Hintenberger v. Garfield
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided February 21, 1958PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
49 N.J. Super. 175 (1958)
139 A.2d 328
EDWARD HINTENBERGER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CITY OF GARFIELD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.
Decided February 21, 1958.
Messrs. Losche and Losche (Mr. George F. Losche, appearing), attorneys for plaintiff.
Mr. Theodore R. Ciesla, attorney for defendant.
SCHNEIDER, J.C.C. (specially assigned).
Plaintiff sues to recover compensation due him as a policeman during his illegal suspension from active duty. The facts are stipulated.
The plaintiff was appointed as a patrolman of the City of Garfield, Bergen County, N.J., on April 16,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Carlo v. the Okonite-Callender Cable Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1949
- De Marco v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of Bergen CountySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1956
- Neiman v. HurffSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
- Whitney v. LottNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1944
- State v. HintenbergerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. CusickNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1971
- Unsatisfied Cl. & Judg. Fd. Bd. v. Concord Ins.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1970