Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. Robert B. Rottkamp, Jr. argued the cause for appellants Friedman ( Messrs. Merlino Andrew, attorneys). Mr. Arthur Penn, Director, Division of Public Interest Advocacy, argued the cause for respondents ( Mr. Stanley C. Van Ness, Public Advocate, attorney; Messrs. Arthur Penn and Peter A. Buchsbaum, Assistant Deputy Public Advocate, on the brief). Mr. William F. Hyland, Attorney General of New Jersey, filed a brief amicus curiae ( Mr. Stephen Skillman, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Mr. Michael A. Santaniello, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
Judges
  • PER CURIAM.
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
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. Robert B. Rottkamp, Jr. argued the cause for appellants Friedman ( Messrs. Merlino Andrew, attorneys). Mr. Arthur Penn, Director, Division of Public Interest Advocacy, argued the cause for respondents ( Mr. Stanley C. Van Ness, Public Advocate, attorney; Messrs. Arthur Penn and Peter A. Buchsbaum, Assistant Deputy Public Advocate, on the brief). Mr. William F. Hyland, Attorney General of New Jersey, filed a brief amicus curiae ( Mr. Stephen Skillman, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Mr. Michael A. Santaniello, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
Judges
  • PER CURIAM.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

DENNIS J. JONES, MARLENE FEDER AND MARCUS I. FEDER, CITIZENS AND TAXPAYERS OF EAST WINDSOR, MERCER COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, AND STANLEY C. VAN NESS, PUBLIC ADVOCATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENTS, v. EAST WINDSOR REGIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION AND ITS MEMBERS; RICHARD C. FRIEDMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A MEMBER OF SAID BOARD, AND LYNN B. FRIEDMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS FORMER PRESIDENT OF SAID BOARD, DEFENDANT-APPELLANTS.

PER CURIAM.

At oral argument the parties freely admitted that all of the issues projected in the within appeal have become moot. We also conclude that the appeal has become moot and that none of the issues is of such public importance as to require their resolution.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

JONES v. EAST WINDSOR REG. BD. OF EDUCATION
(Apr 15, 1977)