Flemming v. RONSON CORPORATION

275 A.2d 759, 114 N.J. Super. 221

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division·Decided April 5, 1971·Published

Opinion

114 N.J. Super. 221 (1971) 275 A.2d 759

C.P. FLEMMING, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
RONSON CORPORATION, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued February 9, 1971. Decided April 5, 1971.

Before Judges LEWIS, MATTHEWS and MINTZ.

*222 Mr. Harry Heher, Jr. argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. Lewis H. Eslinger of the New York Bar, admitted pro hac vice, argued the cause for respondent (Messrs. Weinberg and Manoff, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Seidman in his reported opinion, 107 N.J. Super. 311.

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

114 N.J. Super. 221 (1971) 275 A.2d 759

C.P. FLEMMING, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
RONSON CORPORATION, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued February 9, 1971. Decided April 5, 1971.

Before Judges LEWIS, MATTHEWS and MINTZ.

*222 Mr. Harry Heher, Jr. argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. Lewis H. Eslinger of the New York Bar, admitted pro hac vice, argued the cause for respondent (Messrs. Weinberg and Manoff, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Seidman in his reported opinion, 107 N.J. Super. 311.

Flemming v. RONSON CORPORATION, 275 A.2d 759, 114 N.J. Super. 221 (N.J. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

275 A.2d 759 (Flemming v. RONSON CORPORATION) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Flemming v. Ronson Corp.

258 A.2d 153 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1969)

Flemming v. Ronson Corp.

275 A.2d 759 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1971)