Philadelphia v. Stadler
This text of 413 A.2d 996 (Philadelphia v. Stadler) 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
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
HENRY H. STADLER, SALVATORE DIMARTINO, JOSEPH A. SULPIZIE, JAMES SPROULES AND JAMES M. MCCULLOGH, JR., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Before Judges FRITZ, KOLE and LANE.
William S. Ruggierio argued the cause for appellant (Ruggierio & Freeman, attorneys).
Charles Crabbe Thomas argued the cause for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the judgment essentially for the reasons given in Judge Wells' published opinion. Philadelphia v. Stadler, 164 N.J. Super. 281 (Cty.D.Ct. 1978). See, also, Philadelphia v. Smith, 82 N.J. 429 (1980), aff'g 169 N.J. Super. 156 (App.Div. 1979).
We find no merit to any of the contentions raised on this appeal as grounds for reversal.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
413 A.2d 996, 173 N.J. Super. 235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philadelphia-v-stadler-njsuperctappdiv-1980.