McMenamin v. EVESHAM MUN. UTIL. AUTHORITY

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

McMenamin v. EVESHAM MUN. UTIL. AUTHORITY

256 A.2d 801, 107 N.J. Super. 42

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedSeptember 23, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.2d 801 (McMenamin v. EVESHAM MUN. UTIL. AUTHORITY) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McMenamin v. EVESHAM MUN. UTIL. AUTHORITY, 256 A.2d 801, 107 N.J. Super. 42 (N.J. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

107 N.J. Super. 42 (1969) 256 A.2d 801

FRANCIS B. McMENAMIN AND ROSE M. McMENAMIN, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
EVESHAM MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY, A PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC UNDER N.J.S.A. 14B-4, 5 AND 6, IN THE TOWNSHIP OF EVESHAM, BURLINGTON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued September 8, 1969. Decided September 23, 1969.

Before Judges SULLIVAN, CARTON and HALPERN.

Mr. William B. Colsey III argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Powell and Davis, attorneys).

Mr. Joseph S. Georgiana argued the cause for respondents (Messrs. Capehart and Scatchard, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment herein is affirmed for the reasons stated by Judge Wick in the Chancery Division, 104 N.J. Super. 161 (1969).

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

107 N.J. Super. 42 (1969) 256 A.2d 801

FRANCIS B. McMENAMIN AND ROSE M. McMENAMIN, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
EVESHAM MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY, A PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC UNDER N.J.S.A. 14B-4, 5 AND 6, IN THE TOWNSHIP OF EVESHAM, BURLINGTON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued September 8, 1969. Decided September 23, 1969.

Before Judges SULLIVAN, CARTON and HALPERN.

Mr. William B. Colsey III argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Powell and Davis, attorneys).

Mr. Joseph S. Georgiana argued the cause for respondents (Messrs. Capehart and Scatchard, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment herein is affirmed for the reasons stated by Judge Wick in the Chancery Division, 104 N.J. Super. 161 (1969).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.2d 801, 107 N.J. Super. 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcmenamin-v-evesham-mun-util-authority-njsuperctappdiv-1969.

Opinion

FRANCIS B. McMENAMIN AND ROSE M. McMENAMIN, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. EVESHAM MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY, A PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC UNDER N.J.S.A. 14B-4, 5 AND 6, IN THE TOWNSHIP OF EVESHAM, BURLINGTON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

FRANCIS B. McMENAMIN AND ROSE M. McMENAMIN, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
EVESHAM MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY, A PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC UNDER N.J.S.A. 14B-4, 5 AND 6, IN THE TOWNSHIP OF EVESHAM, BURLINGTON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.