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

PETER BOYARIN AND BERNARD BOYARIN, T/A P B HOLDING COMPANY,PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY,DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.HYMAN WEIDENFELD AND BARBARA WEIDENFELD, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,

PER CURIAM.

The Appellate Division, in unreported opinions, affirmed the decisions of the Law Division granting summary judgment in favor of respondent substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division in Creek Ranch, Inc. v. New Jersey Turnpike Authority, 156 N.J. Super. 1 (1976). Appellants filed notices of appeal as of right with this Court by virtue of dissents in the Appellate Division. Upon application of appellants, we granted them leave to rely on the arguments presented to this Court in the Creek Ranch matter.

This Court has filed its opinion in Creek Ranch, Inc. v. New Jersey Turnpike Authority, 75 N.J. 421 (1978) this day. The judgment in these two appeals is reversed for the reasons expressed in the Creek Ranch opinion, and the matters are remanded to the Law Division for further proceedings consistent with that opinion.

HUGHES, C.J., dissenting:

I would affirm the judgments of the Appellate Division substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of that court in Creek Ranch, Inc. v. New Jersey Turnpike Authority, 156 N.J. Super. 1 (1976).

For reversal and remandment — Justices PASHMAN, CLIFFORD, SCHREIBER and HANDLER — 4.

For affirmance — Chief Justice HUGHES — 1.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BOYARIN v. NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
(Feb 16, 1978)