Legal Opinion

Maryland Cas. Co. v. Heiot

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided February 4, 1988PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

224 N.J. Super. 441 (1988)

540 A.2d 920

MARYLAND CASUALTY CO., PLAINTIFF,

v.

ROSE HEIOT, DEFENDANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division Special Civil Part, Bergen County.

Decided February 4, 1988.

James B. Graziano for plaintiff (Psak & Parker, attorneys).

Maria I. Daniskas for defendant (Robert W. McAndrew, attorney)

EICHEN, J.S.C.

This matter is before the court on defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's[1] complaint on the ground that the action is barred by the "fireman's rule." Although no affidavits were filed in support or in opposition to the motion, the pertinent…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Krauth v. Israel Geller and Buckingham Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  2. Lipson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Berko v. FredaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
  4. Mahoney v. Carus Chemical Co., Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1986
  5. Trainor v. SantanaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Rosa v. Dunkin' Donuts of PassaicSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1991
  2. Cella v. Interstate PropertiesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1989
  3. Martellucci v. Federal Deposit InsuranceSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2000
  4. Lees v. LoboscoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1993
  5. Chipps v. Newmarket Condominium Ass'nNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1988

6 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