Fantasia v. HESS OIL & CHEMICAL CORPORATION
273 A.2d 402, 113 N.J. Super. 229
Opinion
LARAINE FANTASIA, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
HESS OIL & CHEMICAL CORPORATION, NOW HESS OIL & CHEMICAL DIV., AMERADA HESS CORPORATION, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Before Judges GOLDMANN, LEONARD and MOUNTAIN.
Mr. John M. Strichek argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Waters & McPherson, attorneys).
Mr. James A. Robottom argued the cause for respondent (Messrs. Haskins, Robottom & Hack, attorneys).
PER CURIAM.
We affirm essentially for the reasons stated in the opinion of County Judge Arnold, reported at 110 N.J. Super. 360 (1970).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Fantasia v. HESS OIL & CHEMICAL CORPORATION, 273 A.2d 402, 113 N.J. Super. 229 (N.J. Ct. App. 1971).
273 A.2d 402 (Fantasia v. HESS OIL & CHEMICAL CORPORATION) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fantasia v. Hess Oil and Chemical Corp.
265 A.2d 565 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1970)