INGRAHAM v. TRAVELERS COMPANIES, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Darrell Fineman argued the cause for appellant ( Capizola, Fineman Kutner, attorneys
Darrell Fineman
Barbara R. Lapham, on the briefs). Edward H. Keiper argued the cause for respondent ( Richard A. De Michele, attorney
Edward H. Keiper, Arthur E. Donnelly,
Katharine Traeger, on the briefs).

Judges

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Darrell Fineman argued the cause for appellant ( Capizola, Fineman Kutner, attorneys
Darrell Fineman
Barbara R. Lapham, on the briefs). Edward H. Keiper argued the cause for respondent ( Richard A. De Michele, attorney
Edward H. Keiper, Arthur E. Donnelly,
Katharine Traeger, on the briefs).

Judges

See more information ...

Smart Summary

GERALDINE INGRAHAM, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THE TRAVELERS COMPANIES,DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 217 N.J. Super. 126 (1987).

For affirmance — Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O'HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN — 7.

Opposed — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.