Gilday v. Hauchwit
226 A.2d 834, 48 N.J. 557, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 281
This text of 226 A.2d 834 (Gilday v. Hauchwit) 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
Gilday v. Hauchwit, 226 A.2d 834, 48 N.J. 557, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 281 (N.J. 1967).
Opinion
The judgment as to the defendant Carlo is reversed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Gaulkin and the matter is remanded to the Passaic County Court with directions to enter judgment in favor of said defendant.
For reversal — Chief Justice Weintraub and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Hall, Schettino and Haneman — 6.
For affirmance — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Kassick v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp.
576 A.2d 270 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1990)
Butler v. Acme Markets, Inc.
445 A.2d 1141 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1982)
Suarez v. Dosky
407 A.2d 1237 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1979)
Steward v. Magnolia
340 A.2d 678 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1975)
Logan v. Tp. of No. Brunswick
322 A.2d 467 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1974)
Kent v. County of Hudson
245 A.2d 747 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1968)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
226 A.2d 834, 48 N.J. 557, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilday-v-hauchwit-nj-1967.