Legal Opinion
BOR. OF E. RUTHERFORD v. Sisselman
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided May 22, 1953PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
26 N.J. Super. 133 (1953)
97 A.2d 431
THE BOROUGH OF EAST RUTHERFORD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
H. JEROME SISSELMAN, DEFENDANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division.
Decided May 22, 1953.
Mr. Raymond H. Flanagan, attorney for the plaintiff (Mr. Alexander M. Goldfinger, of counsel).
Mr. Albert V. D'Amato, attorney for the defendant.
Mr. Harry Schaffer, attorney for the intervenors.
STANTON, J.S.C.
This is an action for the specific performance of a contract for the sale of lands by the plaintiff to the defendant. It acquired its title through the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Le Maistre v. LeffersSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- City of Newark v. YeskelSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1950
- Lavender v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Institution for Savings in NewburyportMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Day v. KingslandNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gaub v. Nassau Homes, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
- St. Michael's Passionist Monastery v. City of Union CityNew Jersey Tax Court · 1983