Fairclough v. Baumgartner

84 A.2d 545, 8 N.J. 187
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedNovember 19, 1951
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 84 A.2d 545 (Fairclough v. Baumgartner) 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
Fairclough v. Baumgartner, 84 A.2d 545, 8 N.J. 187 (N.J. 1951).

Opinion

8 N.J. 187 (1951)
84 A.2d 545

ELMER FAIRCLOUGH AND MARTHA FAIRCLOUGH, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
HERMAN BAUMGARTNER AND THERESA BAUMGARTNER, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued November 12, 1951.
Decided November 19, 1951.

*190 Mr. J. Mortimer Rubenstein argued the cause for the appellants (Mr. Milton Schamach, attorney).

Mr. I. Arthur Weiss argued the cause for the respondents (Messrs. Weiss & Weiss, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Grimshaw.

For affirmance — Chief Justice VANDERBILT, and Justices CASE, OLIPHANT, WACHENFELD, BURLING and ACKERSON — 6.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

Congregation Sons of Israel v. Congregation Meorosnosson, Inc.
New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2026
Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services
9 A.3d 882 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)
Leasehold Estates, Inc. v. Fulbro Holding Co.
136 A.2d 423 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1957)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
84 A.2d 545, 8 N.J. 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fairclough-v-baumgartner-nj-1951.