Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
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
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

LINDEN SHORE DISTRICT v. CAROL C. JOHNSON ET AL.

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the record and have closely examined the file and briefs in this case. We find nothing to substantiate the named defendant's claims of error.

During the course of the appeal, we denied the plaintiff's motion to strike the brief of the named defendant, without prejudice to the right of the plaintiff to renew its motion at the time of oral argument. The plaintiff renewed its motion. We again deny it.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LINDEN SHORE DISTRICT v. JOHNSON
(Jun 11, 1985)