AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL LTD., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, CROSS-RESPONDENT, v. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, CROSS-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Chancery Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Lester in his opinion which is reported in 179 N.J. Super. 155.

Absent proof that the process of defendant is akin to a monopoly or constitutes by analogy a public utility, we agree that defendant may assert the conditions here involved when accepting film for processing.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PENTHOUSE INT'L LTD. v. EASTMAN KODAK CO
(Apr 2, 1982)