Melick v. Stanley
This text of 436 A.2d 954 (Melick v. Stanley) 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.
Opinion
FRANK H. MELICK, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES L. STANLEY AND JAMES L. STANLEY, JR., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
*129 Before Judges KING and POLOW.
Robert P. Clark argued the cause for appellant (Clark, Gertler & Hanna attorneys).
Anthony D. Buonadonna argued the cause for respondents (Tusco, Gruccio, Pepper, Buonadonna, Giovinazzi & Butler attorneys).
PER CURIAM.
The summary judgment granted in favor of defendants is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Miller's reported opinion. Melick v. Stanley, 174 N.J. Super. 271 (Law Div. 1980). We need not consider whether Nationwide's subrogation interests would be preserved if Delaware law were not applicable, id. at 277-78 since we agree with Judge Miller's conclusion that Delaware law does apply. "[T]he place of the contract will govern the determination of the rights and liabilities of the parties under the insurance policy." State Farm, etc., Ins. Co. v. Simmons' Estate, 84 N.J. 28, 37 (1980).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
436 A.2d 954, 181 N.J. Super. 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melick-v-stanley-njsuperctappdiv-1981.