Carr v. Burgess
623 A.2d 1384, 264 N.J. Super. 10, 1993 N.J. Super. LEXIS 140
Opinion
The judgment of the Chancery Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Epstein in his opinion reported at 264 N.J.Super. 191, 623 A.2d 1384 (Ch.Div.1993). We are satisfied that the findings of fact are supported by substantial [11]*11credible evidence in the record and find no sound reason or justification to interfere with them. See Rova Farms Resort v. Investors Ins. Co., 65 N.J. 474, 484, 323 A.2d 495 (1974).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Carr v. Burgess, 623 A.2d 1384, 264 N.J. Super. 10, 1993 N.J. Super. LEXIS 140 (N.J. Ct. App. 1993).
623 A.2d 1384 (Carr v. Burgess) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kay v. Kay
964 A.2d 324 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2009)
County of Camden v. Waldman
678 A.2d 1101 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1996)