Cosgrove v. Ellenstein

176 A. 178, 114 N.J.L. 155, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 197
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedJanuary 10, 1935
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 176 A. 178 (Cosgrove v. Ellenstein) 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
Cosgrove v. Ellenstein, 176 A. 178, 114 N.J.L. 155, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 197 (N.J. 1935).

Opinion

Pee Cubiam.

Plaintiff and defendant were, by jury verdict and judgment, held liable in damages to another as joint tort feasors. Plaintiff paid the judgment and seeks contribution from the defendant. The court below struck the complaint upon the ground that it did not disclose a cause of action. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

The single question is whether the courts will assist one joint tort feasor to obtain contribution from another. The answer, in this state, is clearly and definitely in the negative. Public Service v. Matteucci, 105 N. J. L. 114; Manowitz v. Kanov, 107 Id. 523; Newman v. Fowler, 37 Id. 89; Fiorentino v. Adkins, 9 N. J. Mis. R. 446.

Judgment affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Paexeb, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heheb, Pebsiiie, Yaw Buseiek, Kays, Hetfield, Deab, Wells, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

DOUGLAS EX REL. DOUGLAS v. Sheridan
98 A.2d 632 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)
Frank Martz Coach Co. v. Hudson Bus Transportation Co.
44 A.2d 488 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
176 A. 178, 114 N.J.L. 155, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cosgrove-v-ellenstein-nj-1935.