Kalman Floor Co., Inc. v. Jos. L. Muscarelle, Inc.

486 A.2d 334, 98 N.J. 266
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 31, 1985·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

98 N.J. 266 (1985)
486 A.2d 334

KALMAN FLOOR COMPANY, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
JOS. L. MUSCARELLE, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF,
v.
WAKEFERN FOOD CORP., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT. KALMAN FLOOR COMPANY, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION, JOS. L. MUSCARELLE, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, GEORGE H. FRIEDMAN AND CAROL MOFFATT, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued January 7, 1985.
Decided January 31, 1985.

*267 Merritt T. Viscardi argued the cause for appellant (Apruzzese & McDermott, Mastro & Murphy, attorneys).

Gerald W. Conway argued the cause for respondent Jos. L. Muscarelle, Inc. (Conway & Reiseman and Shannon Z. Taylor, attorneys).

Robert M. Schwartz argued the cause for respondents American Arbitration Association, George H. Friedman and Carol Moffatt (Amdur & Friedrich, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 196 N.J. Super. 16 (1984).

For affirmance — Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O'HERN and GARIBALDI — 6.

For reversal — None.

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

Kalman Floor Co., Inc. v. Jos. L. Muscarelle, Inc., 486 A.2d 334, 98 N.J. 266 (N.J. 1985).

486 A.2d 334 (Kalman Floor Co., Inc. v. Jos. L. Muscarelle, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Exxon Corp. v. Mack
237 N.J. Super. 16 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1989)