Rosenthal v. Art Metal, Inc.
This text of 250 A.2d 747 (Rosenthal v. Art Metal, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
LAWRENCE H. ROSENTHAL, INDIVIDUALLY AND t/a INDUSTRIAL REALTY AND FEIST & FEIST, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
ART METAL, INC., ETC., AND GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, ETC., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Mr. Edwin H. Stern argued the cause for appellant, Feist & Feist (Messrs. Hellring, Lindeman & Landau, attorneys).
Mr. Joel Sondak argued the cause for appellant Lawrence H. Rosenthal (Messrs. Okin, Okin & Sondak, attorneys; Messrs. Schechner & Targan, of counsel).
Mr. William L. Dill, Jr., argued the cause for respondent General Dynamics Corp. (Messrs. Stryker, Tams & Dill, attorneys; Mr. W. Hunt Dumont, of counsel).
Mr. Richard R. Hellstern argued the cause for respondent Art Metal. Inc. (Messrs. Lowenstein, Sandler, Brochin & Kohl, attorneys; Mr. Murry D. Brochin and Mr. Richard R. Hellstern, of counsel).
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, 101 N.J. Super. 156.
For affirmance Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN 6.
For reversal None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
250 A.2d 747, 53 N.J. 344, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenthal-v-art-metal-inc-nj-1969.