Moore v. Garden State Bus Lines

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Moore v. Garden State Bus Lines

83 A.2d 311, 15 N.J. Super. 254, 1951 N.J. Super. LEXIS 696

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedSeptember 12, 1951

StatusPublished

This text of 83 A.2d 311 (Moore v. Garden State Bus Lines) 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

Moore v. Garden State Bus Lines, 83 A.2d 311, 15 N.J. Super. 254, 1951 N.J. Super. LEXIS 696 (N.J. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Gueiam.

Plaintiff appeals from an interlocutory order of the Superior Court, Law Division, made on defendants’ motion, changing the venue of the action from one county to another.

An appeal from an interlocutory order cannot be maintained unless it be permitted by one of the provisions of Rule 4:2-2. Plaintiff argues first that an order changing the venue in effect prohibits the plaintiff from proceeding with the action in the county of his choice and hence falls within that branch of the rule that gives an appeal from an interlocutory order granting an injunction. The contention is entirely without merit. Cf. Warren v. Hague, 11 N. J. Super. 312 (App. Div. 1951). Plaintiff next urges that he comes within the clause that allows an appeal “when necessary to preserve and maintain the res or status quo pending final judgment and prevent irreparable injury or mischief.” The point is not well taken. Rossbach v. Evening News Pub. Co., 3 N. J. Super. 143 (App. Div. 1949). See also 4 C. J. S., Appeal & Error, § 115, p. 209; Jiffy Lubricator Co., Inc., v. Stewart Warner Co., 177 F. 2d 360 (C. C. A. 4, 1949); McCowan v. Ellis, 55 N. E. 2d 554 (Ill. 1944).

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

Pee Gueiam.

Plaintiff appeals from an interlocutory order of the Superior Court, Law Division, made on defendants’ motion, changing the venue of the action from one county to another.

An appeal from an interlocutory order cannot be maintained unless it be permitted by one of the provisions of Rule 4:2-2. Plaintiff argues first that an order changing the venue in effect prohibits the plaintiff from proceeding with the action in the county of his choice and hence falls within that branch of the rule that gives an appeal from an interlocutory order granting an injunction. The contention is entirely without merit. Cf. Warren v. Hague, 11 N. J. Super. 312 (App. Div. 1951). Plaintiff next urges that he comes within the clause that allows an appeal “when necessary to preserve and maintain the res or status quo pending final judgment and prevent irreparable injury or mischief.” The point is not well taken. Rossbach v. Evening News Pub. Co., 3 N. J. Super. 143 (App. Div. 1949). See also 4 C. J. S., Appeal & Error, § 115, p. 209; Jiffy Lubricator Co., Inc., v. Stewart Warner Co., 177 F. 2d 360 (C. C. A. 4, 1949); McCowan v. Ellis, 55 N. E. 2d 554 (Ill. 1944).

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.2d 311, 15 N.J. Super. 254, 1951 N.J. Super. LEXIS 696, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-garden-state-bus-lines-njsuperctappdiv-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack