Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
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

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HENRY H. STADLER, SALVATORE DIMARTINO, JOSEPH A. SULPIZIE, JAMES SPROULES AND JAMES M. MCCULLOGH, JR., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment essentially for the reasons given in Judge Wells' published opinion. Philadelphia v. Stadler, 164 N.J. Super. 281 (Cty.D.Ct. 1978). See, also, Philadelphia v. Smith, 82 N.J. 429 (1980), aff'g 169 N.J. Super. 156 (App.Div. 1979).

We find no merit to any of the contentions raised on this appeal as grounds for reversal.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PHILADELPHIA v. STADLER
(Apr 18, 1980)