Polcaro v. City of East Orange

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Polcaro v. City of East Orange

310 A.2d 463, 63 N.J. 548, 1973 N.J. LEXIS 215

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedFebruary 13, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 310 A.2d 463 (Polcaro v. City of East Orange) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Polcaro v. City of East Orange, 310 A.2d 463, 63 N.J. 548, 1973 N.J. LEXIS 215 (N.J. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This matter having been duly presented to the Court, it is Ordered that

Application for certification having been made and heard orally, and it appearing to the Court that this order should be made.

It is Ordered that certification is granted (62 N. J. 335), and that the judgment of the Appellate Division, 121 N. J. Super. 325 is reversed and the matter remanded to the Division of Workmen’s Compensation with directions (1) to try and determine the question whether the injuries sustained in the employment prevented the claimant from making a seasonable application to reopen, or a seasonable application for compensation for increased disability, and (2) to try the remaining issues if the claimant prevails on the timeliness issue stated in (1).

For reversal and remandment — Chief Justice Weintraub and Justices Jacobs, Hall and Mountain and Judges Con-ford, Sullivan and Lewis — 7.

Opposed — None.

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

Per Curiam.

This matter having been duly presented to the Court, it is Ordered that

Application for certification having been made and heard orally, and it appearing to the Court that this order should be made.

It is Ordered that certification is granted (62 N. J. 335), and that the judgment of the Appellate Division, 121 N. J. Super. 325 is reversed and the matter remanded to the Division of Workmen’s Compensation with directions (1) to try and determine the question whether the injuries sustained in the employment prevented the claimant from making a seasonable application to reopen, or a seasonable application for compensation for increased disability, and (2) to try the remaining issues if the claimant prevails on the timeliness issue stated in (1).

For reversal and remandment — Chief Justice Weintraub and Justices Jacobs, Hall and Mountain and Judges Con-ford, Sullivan and Lewis — 7.

Opposed — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

310 A.2d 463, 63 N.J. 548, 1973 N.J. LEXIS 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polcaro-v-city-of-east-orange-nj-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack