Romanowski v. Brick Tp.

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Romanowski v. Brick Tp.

469 A.2d 85, 192 N.J. Super. 79

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedNovember 22, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 469 A.2d 85 (Romanowski v. Brick Tp.) 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

Romanowski v. Brick Tp., 469 A.2d 85, 192 N.J. Super. 79 (N.J. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

192 N.J. Super. 79 (1983) 469 A.2d 85

JEFFREY ROMANOWSKI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND ROBERT FORRESTER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Submitted September 19, 1983. Decided November 22, 1983.

Before Judges ARD, MORTON I. GREENBERG and TRAUTWEIN.

*80 Russo, Courtney & Foster, for appellant Township of Brick (Joseph L. Foster on the brief).

Shebell & Schibell, for respondent Jeffrey Romanowski (Raymond P. Shebell on the brief).

Novins, Farley, Grossman & York, for respondent Robert Forrester (Kenneth R. Pentony on the brief).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Havey in his opinion of February 8, 1982. 185 N.J. Super. 197 (Law Div. 1982).

Affirmed.

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

192 N.J. Super. 79 (1983) 469 A.2d 85

JEFFREY ROMANOWSKI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND ROBERT FORRESTER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Submitted September 19, 1983. Decided November 22, 1983.

Before Judges ARD, MORTON I. GREENBERG and TRAUTWEIN.

*80 Russo, Courtney & Foster, for appellant Township of Brick (Joseph L. Foster on the brief).

Shebell & Schibell, for respondent Jeffrey Romanowski (Raymond P. Shebell on the brief).

Novins, Farley, Grossman & York, for respondent Robert Forrester (Kenneth R. Pentony on the brief).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Havey in his opinion of February 8, 1982. 185 N.J. Super. 197 (Law Div. 1982).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

469 A.2d 85, 192 N.J. Super. 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/romanowski-v-brick-tp-njsuperctappdiv-1983.

Opinion

JEFFREY ROMANOWSKI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND ROBERT FORRESTER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

JEFFREY ROMANOWSKI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND ROBERT FORRESTER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, A BODY POLITIC AND CORPORATE IN LAW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.