Biro v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Biro v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America

271 A.2d 1, 57 N.J. 204

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedNovember 23, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 271 A.2d 1 (Biro v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Biro v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 271 A.2d 1, 57 N.J. 204 (N.J. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

57 N.J. 204 (1970) 271 A.2d 1

LORRAINE G. BIRO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND CROSS-RESPONDENT,
v.
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT AND CROSS-APPELLANT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued November 10, 1970. Decided November 23, 1970.

Mr. Benjamin Weiner argued the cause for appellant-cross-respondent (Messrs. Weiner & Schoifet, attorneys; Mr. Edward J. Egan, on the brief).

*205 Mr. Richard H. Woods argued the cause for respondent-cross-appellant (Messrs. Hiering, Grasso, Gelzer & Kelaher, attorneys; Mr. Thomas F. Kelaher, of counsel).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division, 110 N.J. Super. 391, is reversed and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of the Appellate Division.

For reversal Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN 7.

For affirmance None.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

57 N.J. 204 (1970) 271 A.2d 1

LORRAINE G. BIRO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND CROSS-RESPONDENT,
v.
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT AND CROSS-APPELLANT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued November 10, 1970. Decided November 23, 1970.

Mr. Benjamin Weiner argued the cause for appellant-cross-respondent (Messrs. Weiner & Schoifet, attorneys; Mr. Edward J. Egan, on the brief).

*205 Mr. Richard H. Woods argued the cause for respondent-cross-appellant (Messrs. Hiering, Grasso, Gelzer & Kelaher, attorneys; Mr. Thomas F. Kelaher, of counsel).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division, 110 N.J. Super. 391, is reversed and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of the Appellate Division.

For reversal Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN 7.

For affirmance None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.2d 1, 57 N.J. 204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/biro-v-prudential-ins-co-of-america-nj-1970.

Opinion

LORRAINE G. BIRO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND CROSS-RESPONDENT, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT AND CROSS-APPELLANT.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

LORRAINE G. BIRO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND CROSS-RESPONDENT,
v.
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT AND CROSS-APPELLANT.