Wootton Hotel Corp. v. Wootton

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Wootton Hotel Corp. v. Wootton

192 A. 36, 118 N.J.L. 185, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 291

DecidedApril 30, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 192 A. 36 (Wootton Hotel Corp. v. Wootton) 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

Wootton Hotel Corp. v. Wootton, 192 A. 36, 118 N.J.L. 185, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 291 (N.J. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree with the trial judge that the defendants failed to disclose facts which entitle them to defend. It was proper that the answer with its separate defenses should be stricken and that summary judgment for possession should be entered for the plaintiff.

Judgment below will be affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 16.

For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

We agree with the trial judge that the defendants failed to disclose facts which entitle them to defend. It was proper that the answer with its separate defenses should be stricken and that summary judgment for possession should be entered for the plaintiff.

Judgment below will be affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 16.

For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 A. 36, 118 N.J.L. 185, 1937 N.J. LEXIS 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wootton-hotel-corp-v-wootton-nj-1937.