In re N.J.S.A 2C:52-6

715 A.2d 994, 314 N.J. Super. 535, 1998 N.J. Super. LEXIS 358
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division·Decided July 28, 1998·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Law Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Rothenberg in his opinion reported at 314 N.J.Super. 643, 715 A.2d 1048 (Law Div.1997).

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

In re N.J.S.A 2C:52-6, 715 A.2d 994, 314 N.J. Super. 535, 1998 N.J. Super. LEXIS 358 (N.J. Ct. App. 1998).

715 A.2d 994 (In re N.J.S.A 2C:52-6) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re J.S.
121 A.3d 322 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2015)
In the Matter of the Expungement Petition
Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2015
In the Matter of the Expungement Application of D.J.B.
83 A.3d 2 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2014)
In re Kollman
46 A.3d 1247 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2012)
In Re DH
6 A.3d 421 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)
In re the Expungement Petition of D.H.
6 A.3d 421 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)
In re J.B.
902 A.2d 283 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2006)
In re the Forfeiture of Public Office of Nunez
894 A.2d 1176 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2006)