Prickett v. Allard
326 A.2d 688, 66 N.J. 6, 1974 N.J. LEXIS 127
Opinion
The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons exressed by the Appellate Division, 126 N. J. Super. 438.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Hughes and Justices Jacobs, Hall, Mountain, Sullivan, Pashman and Clie-eokd — 7.
For reversal — Vi one.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Prickett v. Allard, 326 A.2d 688, 66 N.J. 6, 1974 N.J. LEXIS 127 (N.J. 1974).
326 A.2d 688 (Prickett v. Allard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
CCM PROPERTIES, LLC VS. THOMAS C. PIEPER (L-1690-16, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2018
Milford Mill 128, LLC v. Borough of Milford
946 A.2d 75 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2008)
Monroe Township Municipal Utilities Authorities v. Consolidated Apartments, Inc.
899 A.2d 337 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2006)
Newman v. Isuzu Motors America
842 A.2d 255 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2004)
Schnitzer v. Rinderer
683 A.2d 207 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1996)
Williams v. Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.
623 A.2d 234 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1993)
Mason v. Nabisco Brands, Inc.
558 A.2d 851 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1989)
Heimbach v. Mueller
550 A.2d 993 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1988)
Edelstein v. Toyota Motors Distributors
422 A.2d 101 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1980)