Fuerstman v. Charles

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Fuerstman v. Charles

169 A. 634, 11 N.J. Misc. 929, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 42

DecidedDecember 4, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A. 634 (Fuerstman v. Charles) 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

Fuerstman v. Charles, 169 A. 634, 11 N.J. Misc. 929, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 42 (N.J. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Stangee, J.

The written communication of counsel for plaintiff and defendant indicate that the only matter in difference between the parties is a question of taxed costs. This is not a proper question to be determined upon a rule to show cause why a verdict should not be set aside and a new trial granted. It seems that the other matters originally raised have been settled by the parties, and there is nothing for the court to do but to dismiss the rule.

I will sign a formal order dismissing the rule to show cause.

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

Stangee, J.

The written communication of counsel for plaintiff and defendant indicate that the only matter in difference between the parties is a question of taxed costs. This is not a proper question to be determined upon a rule to show cause why a verdict should not be set aside and a new trial granted. It seems that the other matters originally raised have been settled by the parties, and there is nothing for the court to do but to dismiss the rule.

I will sign a formal order dismissing the rule to show cause.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A. 634, 11 N.J. Misc. 929, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fuerstman-v-charles-nj-1933.